No. 12383
Gnited States
Court of Appeals
for the Ninth Circuit.
IVA IKUKO TOGURI D’AQUINO,
Appellant,
ins.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Appellee.
Cranseript of Record
In Two Volumes
Volume II
(Pages 463 to 871)
———————————
Appeal from the United States District Court,
Northern District of California,
Southern Division.
MAY 4 1950
SB —Ss«éPhllips & Van Orden Co., 870 Brannon Stregt, Saasrrapsiccoimigeng PAUL POFIIEN,
No. 12383
GAnited States
Court of Appeals
for the |Minth Circuit.
IVA IKUKO TOGURI D’AQUINO,
Appellant,
VS.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Appellee.
Transcript of Record
In Two Volumes
Volume II
(Pages 463 to 871)
Appeal from the United States District Court,
Northern District of California,
Southern Division.
Phillips & Van Orden Co., 870 Brannan Street, San Francisco, Calif.
vs. United States of America 463
In the Southern Division of the United States
District Court for the Northern District of
California
Nowa?
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
VS.
IVA IKUKO TOGURI D’AQUINO,
Defendant.
DEPOSITION OF NICOLAAS SCHENK
Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk, taken before me,
Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the United
States of America, in Mitsui Main Bank Building,
Room 335, in Tokyo, Japan, under the authority of
a certain stipulation for taking oral designations
abroad, and upon order of the United States Dis-
trict Court, made and entered March 22, 1949, in
the Matter of the United States of America vs.
Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, pending in the South-
ern Division of the United States District Court,
for the Northern District of California, and at issue
between the United States of America vs. Iva Ikuko
Toguri D’ Aquino.
The plaintiff, appearing by Frank J. Hennessy,
United States District Attorney; Thomas DeWolfe,
Special Assistant to the Attorney General, and Noel
Story, Special Assistant to the Attorney General,
464 Iva [kuko Toguri D’ Aquino
and the defendant, appearing by Wayne N. Collins
and Theodore ‘’amba.
The said interrogations and answers to the wit-
ness thereto were taken stenographiecally by Mildred
Matz and were then transcribed by her under my
direction, and the said transcription being there-
after read over correctly to the said witness by me
and then signed by said witness in my presence.
It is stipulated that all objections of each of the
parties hereto, including the objections to the form
of the questions propounded to the witness and to
the relevancy, materiality and competency thereof,
and the defendant’s objections to the use of the
deposition, or any part of the deposition, by plain-
tiff, on the plaintiff’s case in chief, shall be reserved
to the time of trial in this cause.
NICOLAAS SCHENK
of Tokyo, Japan, assigned to the Netherlands Mis-
sion in Japan, of lawful age, being by me duly
sworn, deposes and says:
Direct Examination
By Mr. Tamba:
Q. Lt. Schenk, what is your full name?
A. Nicolaas Schenk, Sub-Lieutenant.
@. And you are presently connected with the
Netherlands Legation ?
A. I am working as eustodial officer of the
Netherlands Mission in Japan, Tokyo.
Q. You are a citizen and national of the Nether-
lands? A. Of the Netherlands, yes, sir.
vs. United States of America 465
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
Q@. And you were a prisoner of war at Camp
Bunka? | <A. Yes, sir.
Q. When and where were you captured by the
Japanese forces?
A. Iwas captured the 6th of May, 1942, in Pale-
dang Soetji, Java.
@. After your capture where were you taken?
A. Toa prison in Garoet, and upon release from
prison, interned in a prisoner of war camp. |
Q. Where was that prisoner of war camp?
A. Also in Garoet, the same place.
@. When you were first apprehended were you
interviewed by the Kempei-tai?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial, too remote, not competent;
it doesn’t have to do with Radio Tokyo, this man
was not on Radio Tokyo on the Zero Hour program.
The Court: Submitted?
Mr.-Collins: Yes.
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
(A. Yes, sir.)
Q. Tell us generally what that interview con-
sisted of.
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
(A. Mainly, torture.)
Q. Can you describe the torture?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial and
incompetent.
466 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
(A. Standing out in the sunshine for a couple of
hours with arms stretched sidewards, standing at
attention all the time.)
Q. How about food and water?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as irrelevant.
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
(A. None.) :
@. When you went to this prisoner of war camp,
how long did you remain there?
A. J remained there until July of the same year,
1942. I was then transferred to a camp in Tjimahi.
Q. How long did you remain at that camp ?
A. Until September of the same year. After-
wards I was transferred to Batavia.
Q. How long did you remain in that camp? In
the camp in Batavia?
A. Until December of the same year.
Q. And eventually you were brought to Japan?
A. Brought to Japan in June, 1943.
@. And when you were brought to Japan where
were you taken?
A. To the mine workers camp, Orio, Kyushu.
Coal mine.
Q. You worked in the coal mines? A. Yes.
Q. How long did you remain there?
A. Until I was brought to Tokyo in September,
Q. And where were you taken in Tokyo?
A. First to Camp Omori and in October, be-
us. Umted States of America 467
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
ginning of October, I believe, it was the same year,
I was brought to Bunka Camp, Kanda.
Q. Were you told why you were brought to
Bunka Camp ? a2 Nopsit:
@. And was Bunka camp known by any other
name than Bunka camp?
A. The name Bunka became known to us after
we were in the camp but before that we did not
know the name.
Q. And I assume you were there with a number
of other prisoners of war?
A. We came up to Tokyo with a whole bunch
of people, and from about fifty to sixty people who
were kept secluded from the other prisoners, there
were selected about a dozen who were told to pack
their belongings and were put on a truck and
brought to the camp which we later learned to be
Bunka Camp.
Q. Were you given any orders, at Bunka Camp,
to broadcast ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial, noth-
ing to do with the Zero Hour program, too remote.
Mr. Collins: That remains to be seen, if Your
Honor please.
The Court: Submitted ?
Mr. Collins: That is the time they were brought
here, apparently in December of 1943. Yes.
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to it likewise as hearsay.
The Court: Submitted?
Mr. Collins: Yes.
468 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
The Court: The objection will be sustained. [2*]
(A. The first speech we got did not actually say
what the work would be. However, it was pointed
out that the Japanese expected us to cooperate with
them to secure peace, and those who did not want
to cooperate would be executed.
Q. Who made that speech ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incompe-
tent, irrevelant and immaterial.
Mr. Collins: I might point out, if your Honor
please, that this is the speech of Major T'suneishi,
this is direct impeachment of the testimony of
Major T'suneishi, and the preceding question goes
direct to the very same thing.
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
(A. That was made, I believe, by Major Tsu-
neishi. )
Q. Was that speech translated into English?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, irrelevant,
not germaine to the case, incompetent, not related
to the Zero Hour. |
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
Mr. Collins: It goes to the question of ‘duress,
if your Honor please, which was directly communi-
cated to the defendant by the testimony of the wit-
ness Cousens.
The Court: The court has ruled.
(A. It was translated into the English language
by either Uno or Ikeda.)
* Page numbering appearing at top of page of original
Reporter’s Transcript.
vs. United States of America 469
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
Q. Was Tsuneishi wearing his uniform?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as not germaine, hear-
say, Incompetent.
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
(A. I have never seen Major Tsuneishi in other
dress than uniform. )
Q. Did he have any other things with his habit
besides the uniform ?
Mr. DeWofe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
(A. You are referring to a sword?) [3]
Q. J am referring to a sword.
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as irrelevant, im-
material, incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. He always wore a sword.)
@. Did you ever see Tsuneishi without a sword?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(*. No; sir.)
Q. Did he wear any insignia of a staff officer?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as irrevelant.
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
(A. He wore on the left shoulder the gold wire
gadget which was designed for the general staff.)
Q. When this speech was made, what happened ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent.
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
470 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
(A. A British citizen by the name of Williams
stepped forward and told, in so many words, that
he was not capable of giving any cooperation what-
soever. )
Q. What happened to Williams ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent.
The Court: What happened to who?
Mr. DeWolfe: And hearsay.
The Court: Read that question again.
Q@. What happened to Williams ?
The Court: Williams?
Mr. Collins: Yes.
Mr. DeWolfe: He is another prisoner of war.
Mr. Collins: Well, may I state this, if Your
Honor please, to refresh the recollection of the
court. In connection with this very question, the
testimony of Major Tsuneishi related directly to
this very occurrence. ;
The Court: What occurrences? [4]
Mr. Collins: The occurrences at Camp Bunka on
the occasion of his speeches to the prisoners of war
there assembled to his two distinct speeches, as to
what Major Tsuneishi said. And what he did not
say.
The Court: I am satisfied we are going afield if
we indulge in that line of examination. I always
try, and always have tried, to be very liberal in
relation to the admissibility of any evidence; I have
allowed the widest scope. Now I am prepared to
vs. United States of America 471
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
rule on this question, and I will sustain the objec-
tion.
(A. He was immediately brought away.)
Q. Were you ever told what happened to Wil-
hams at that time?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incompe-
tent, irrelevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. We were not told, but upon questioning by
us we were given to believe that Williams was
executed.)
@. Now, was any speech made after that by
Major Tsuneishi, in the dining room?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant, and immaterial.
The Court: Yes, the objection will be sustained
again.
Mr. Collins: I eall your Honor’s attention to
the impeachment of the testimony of Major Tsu-
neishi, given on that stand.
The Court: for that limited purpose I will allow
it. With the hope that we will go along here and
finally get through.
A. We had a speech almost every day in the
period of about two, three months, and all the
speeches were, to my opinion, intended to break us
down mentally and to force us to believe that there
was no way out and that it was the pure intention
of the Japanese to use us as a vehicle for their own
means and if we were not willing to do what they
472 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
wanted us to do, well, then there was a way out—
to execute us. One line I particularly remember is
that ‘‘nothing is guaranteed.’’ It was used almost
daily by Ikeda and Buddy Uno. [5]
Mr. DeWolfe: Move to strike that answer, your
Honor, as not responsive to the question. The ques-
tion was, ‘‘Was any speech made’’? And then he
goes into his opinion.
The Court: I will allow the question and answer
to stand.
Q. Do you recall a speech made by T'suneishi,
which was translated by Uno or Ikeda in the dining
room, which I referred to as the second speech,
that there were no guards to be posted around the
camp ? A. Yes, sir, I do.
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial, incom-
petent, irrelevant, and too remote to the issues in-
volved. It relates to Camp Bunka. It does not
relate to the Zero Hour program. It is going into
a collateral matter, not involving an issue in the
trial of this case.
Mr: Collins: It goes directly to the circumstances
under which the prisoners of war were held at
Bunka, and the facts of the duress were communi-
eated to the defendant, and the witnesses at this
trial have so testified.
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
(A. Yes, sir, I do. It was during the evening
meal. We had on the second floor of the location
where we were billeted, what we called the dining ~
vs. United States of America 473
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
room. By that time Tsuneishi held a speech and it
was translated to us by Uno, in which he urged
each that, as we could see, there were no fence
around except a wall which could be easily climbed
over, but he wanted us to know that this was par-
ticularly to see how it worked upon us because he
wanted us to realize that we were white men and
the surroundings were Japanese and he could swear
that anybody of us coming across the fence would
be brought back in pieces. )
Q. What were your official duties at the camp
when you first got there?
A. Iwas put in charge of the food supplies, and
its preparing, and as an assistant I got an Austral-
ian boy by the name of Parkyns.
Q. In other words, you were the cook ?
A. Yes, the cook. [6] |
Q.. How was the food you got there? Was it
adequate ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial; a collateral matter. It
does not involve the Zero Hour at Radio Tokyo.
This man was not on that program.
Mr. Collins: It relates to the conditions of duress
under which the defendant was held. Those facts
were communicated to the defendant.
Mr. DeWolfe: These facts were not, according
to the testimony of this witness, communicated to
the defendant. There is no showing to that effect.
Mr. Collins: There is a showing to that effect by
474 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
the witness who testified they were retained there
and they were starved.
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
(A. Absolutely inadequate. )
Q. Please tell us in what particular ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as too remote, in-
competent, irrelevant, nothing to do with the Zero
Hour.
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
(A. We got a ration of three teacups of kaoliang
per day and three bowls of soup to get that down
with. The bowls of soup were a little bit larger than
the teacups. The soup merely consisted of daikon,
which is horse-radish, a little salt, a little soya, to
which water was added.)
Q. What does this kaoliang consist of ?
Mr. DeWolfe: That is a food, I presume, Your
Honor. I object to it as incompetent, irrelevant
and immaterial.
The Court: The same ruling. Objection sus-
tained. ow
(A. The kaoliang is a kind of a corn which the
encyclopedia describes as a vehicle to fill the bellies
of chicken, and its effect 1s severe beri-beri and
palagra.) [7]
Q. Did any of the civilian employees and officers
of the Japanese army of Kempei-tai take part of
your rations ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial, not
relevant to the issues involved.
vs. United States of America 479
-(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
The Court: The objection may be overruled. He
may answer.
A. That happened daily from the start.
Q. What did they do?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as not being ma-
terial to the issues involved concerning the defend-
ant’s participation in the Zero Hour program, what
the Jap officers did with the prisoners of war in
eamp with respect to their prisoner of war rations,
sir.
The Court: Submitted?
Mr. Collins: Yes.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I was issued by the supply man, Ishikawa,
a certain amount of rice for so many prisoners of
war and by the time it was prepared I was told to
separate so much for the school boys who were
working there, a civilian who was supposed to be
guarding us, and who spoke a little bit of English,
that was three, and later that number was increased
to five.)
Q. In other words, they would take their ra-
tions, and
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as leading and
collateral, immaterial, incompetent, nothing to do
with the defendant’s participation in the Zero
Hour; too remote.
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
(A. And leave what was left.)
476 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
Q. Did any of the prisoners of war show evi-
dence of malnutrition ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as having noth-
ing to do with the issues here involved ; incompetent
and irrelevant. .
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
Q. Will you describe some of these effects?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: The objection is sustained.
(A. Kalbfleisch broke out into boils in a very
short time. McNaughton got the same trouble.
Major Cox laid down for about [8] three months,
not being able to move; Larry Quilly lost in about
six months about forty pounds; I, myself, suffered
a diminishing of eyesight, and later my legs, what
you call the adequate name they got for it, my legs
did not come in use. )
Q. In other words, your legs would not func-
tion ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as immaterial
and incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
@. Was beri beri prevalent in the camp ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Mr. Collins: May I point out that these matters
were communicated to the defendant ?
vs. Umted States of America ATT
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
The Court: Who is testifying ?
Mr. Collins: This is Nicolaas Schenk, prisoner
of war, who was detained there.
The Court: The Court has ruled. There is no
connection between this witness testifying now and
the issues involved in this case, which concern acts
alleged to have occurred at this radio broadcasting
station.
(A. All of us had it.)
Q. Do you recall any prisoner of war suffering
from temporary blindness ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as too remote, imma-
terial and incompetent, nothing to do with the
issues here involved. |
The Court: Objection is sustained.
(A. Capt. Kalbfleisch was complaining of it,
and, I believe, Mark Streiter. )
Q. Do you recall any of the prisoners of war
losing their hair because of deficiency of vitamins
in their diet?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as calling for coneclu-
sion; incompetent and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I believe it was Larry Quilly.) [9]
Q. Would you tell us what you did, or other
prisoners of war did, in order to secure food around
the camp?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial and
incompetent.
The Court: Objection ‘sustained.
(A. Sometimes Major Cousens, Capt. Ince,
478 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
brought some foodstuffs he got from the boys and
girls at Radio Tokyo; we had, further, an old lady
and a husband living in the basement of our quar-
ters, who were sent out once in a while to get us
some food items and the rest was stolen and we
grazed the trees.)
Q. What do you mean by grazed the trees?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected: to as immaterial and
incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. We eollected the young leaves from the
trees. We had several trees around the place and we
used to take the young leaves because it was proven
in Singapore that they were quite edible.)
Q. How about dogs and cats?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, irrele-
vant and immaterial. |
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. We had quite a few when we came and when
we left there were none. )
Q. How many did you consume?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, irrele-
vant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I personally killed two eats.)
Q. What other prisoners of war?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, irrele-
vant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Q. Did you consume any dogs? |
vs. United States of America 479
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial and
incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(49 Ves; sir.)
Q. How many, do you recall?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial and in-
competent and irrelevant. [10]
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. At least two.)
Q. Incidentally, was Kalbfleisch taken away
from the camp?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay; incom-
petent, irrelevant and immaterial. Kalbfleisch is
here as a defense witness. I do not know whether
his testimony is going to become competent on that
point. It is better to wait and sec.
Mr. Collins: This is testimony of the circum-
stances under which Kalbfleisch was taken away.
The fact was communicated to the defendant. Kalb-
fleisch was taken away to be executed.
Mr. DeWolfe: ‘There is no such showing.
The Court: The objection is sustained.
(A. Kalbfleisch was taken away, I believe, in the
middle or the beginning of 1944, I am not sure. He
was taken away very suddenly. We were ealled
together in the room by Uno and somebody from
the Japanese headquarters of the general staff read
to us in Japanese, which was partially translated by
Uno, and Kalbfleisch was led away, brought up-
stairs to the officers’ room, to pack a few things,
480 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
and was not even able to say goodby to any of the
boys, and taken out of the camp.)
Q. Were you led to believe that Kalbfleisch was
executed ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as calling for a con-
clusion; incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial,
what he was led to believe.
The Court: What he was led to believe will go
out; let the jury disregard it. The objection is
sustained.
(A. Yes, sir.)
@. And how did you come to that conclusion ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as calling for a
conclusion.
Mr. Collins: This relates now to what they were
told by the officers at Bunka.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Uno told us during a discussion on com-
mentaries. I believe it was to Shattles, who refused
to take a part in a seript from Mark Streiter, that
in case he refused to obey orders he would go the
same way as Kalbfleisch. They were intending to
say that Kalbfleisch was executed.) [11]
Q. Let me ask you, Lt. Schenk, did any of the
prisoners of war voluntarily broadcast over the
Japanese radio?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as calling for a
conclusion of law.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Not to my opinion, sir.)
us. United States of America 481
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
Q. Were any of the prisoners of war around the
camp slapped by Japanese army officers or civilians.
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial; not connected with the
defendant or the issues here involved.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Quite repeatedly.)
Q. Who, sir?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent
and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained..
Mr. Collins: May I point out, if your Honor
please, that that very question goes to the question
of whether or not a member of the Zero Hour pro-
gram himself was beaten.
The Court: Read the question again.
Mr. Collins: The question was, ‘‘Who, sir?’
The preceding question to which there was an an-
swer was: ‘‘Were any of the prisoners of war
around the camp slapped by Japanese army officers
or civilians ?”’
The Court: J sustained the objection.
(A. Leaving myself out, I know and I have
seen that Larry Quilly has been beaten quite re-
peatedly ; that Capt. Ince was beaten quite severely ;
that Henshaw has been beaten; Parkyns, Shattles
and myself.)
Q. Who beat the prisoners of war?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as immaterial and
incompetent and irrelevant.
482 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Lt. Hamamoto; a sergeant from the Kempei
tai, I do not recall his name though; and Mr. Uno,
and two or three other Japanese whom I am not
able to recall by name. Shishikara was another
name, and Endo.)
@. Did Ikeda beat the prisoners?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Ikeda never did.)
Q. Who was Ikeda’s brother-in-law ?
A. He brought the brother-in-law in who was
presented to us as a director of music.
@. Was he at the camp?
A. He was—he did not give to me the impres-
sion as being regularly connected with the camp,
but he came a few times.
@. Was Hamamoto under T'suneishi ?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And Ikeda? A. I think so.
Q. And Uno? A. Same.
Q. And the sergeant you mentioned?
ne” Yes; six:
Q. Was the Kempei tai stationed at the camp
continually ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as immaterial and
incompetent; not connected with the issues in the
case. .
(A. Yes, sir.)
Q. Did they keep a room at the camp ?
vs. United States of America 483
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling. The objection is sus-
tained.
(A. They kept a room. Lt. Hamamoto kept a
room directly across the prisoner of war location;
the sergeant occupied a room on top of the main
building, looking quite directly into the rooms of
the enlisted men and officers, while some other fel-
lows had their room on the right side of the camp
so that we really were rather good guarded.) [13]
Q. Will you tell us about the occasion when
Capt. Ince was slapped.
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as being incom-
petent, irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: When?
Mr. Collins: This is in December, 19438, if your
Honor please, while they were on the Zero Hour
program.
The Court: That question does not indicate the
time.
Mr. Collins: The foundation is laid for the very
time by the testimony of other witnesses.
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
(A. Captain Ince. I saw him beaten once during
a morning exercises. Ince was quite a while sick,
suffering from neuralgia and beri-beri, and was
a weak fellow. In fact he weighed at that time about
one hundred and thirty pounds, at the most, and he
was about a head taller than I am, so it was not
much. We were standing in the courtyard and Ince
484 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
was called out that he had to go out and do exer-
cise, by the sergeant of the Kempei tai. So Ince
came out in line and were were told to do an exer-
cise by which the head had to bend low, and doing
that on an empty belly, it made Ince, as well as
others, dizzy, so Ince was trying to get up again, and
was a little too groggy, and at that moment we
heard a loud scream and Lt. Hamamoto came out
from his room, running into the courtyard directly
up to Ince and with all his might he placed an
uppercut on Ince’s chin and Ince was knocked out
and lay unconscious for a few minutes. From per-
sonal experience I would lke to add to this that I
know that the swing from Lt. Hamamoto was pretty
severe because he knocked me out, myself, when
I complained about food, and it took me four days
to recover from that.) |
Q. When the prisoners of war were first ordered
to broadeast, were they broadcasting from scripts
prepared by themselves? A. No, sir. [14]
Mr. DeWolfe: What line is that?
Mr. Tamba: 22.
Mr. Collins: Page 9.
Mr. DeWolfe: JI am sorry. I was looking at a
eriminal rule with respect to this.
The Court: We will take a recess so you can
look further.
Mr. DeWolfe: I was looking at a rule on this
point and I lost the place.
(Thereupon a recess was taken.)
us. United States of America 485
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
(The deposition of Nicolaas Schenk is being
read.)
The Court: Proceed.
Mr. Collins: Line 25.
Q. Who prepared the scripts, if you know?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
relevant and immaterial, having nothing to do
with the Zero Hour. !
The Court: Nothing to do with’ the script?
Mr. DeWolfe: ‘These are scripts of the Zero
Hour program.
Mr. Collins: You are assuming something, Mr.
DeWolfe.
The Court: I will allow it. The objection is over-
ruled.
A. We were later told by Hiyoshi and Osaki that
the scripts were prepared by people working at
Domei, who received a pretty good payment for it.
The Court: The objection will be sustained. Let
it go out and let the jury disregard it.
Q. Later were prisoners of war ordered to pre-
pare the scripts?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial, not relative to the issues
here involved.
The Court: I will allow him to answer.
A. Yes.
Q. Tell us about the blackboard assignments.
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
486 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
irrelevant and immaterial. These are prisoner of
war broadcasts. They have nothing to do with the
Zero Hour.
Mr. Collins: You are assuming something there,
Mr. DeWolfe.
Mr. DeWolfe: There is no testimony hooking it
up with the issues involved. [15]
The Court: I have not seen those depositions at
all. I do not know what is in them and I do not
know what follows. Unless they are connected up,
of course they will have to go out. I will sustain
the objection. |
(A. Uno came over to our quarters and told us
that T'suneishi had ordered that the blackboard
should be put on the wall, bearing the names of all
prisoners of war and showing exactly their activi-
ties in connection with the program. We were called
to attention in the bedroom and Uno pointed out
that each and everyone of us had to participate in
the broadeast and full cooperation was expected,
otherwise nothing would be guaranteed. In spite
of the rather severe instructions from Uno a few
of us made some comment to the effect as: ‘‘Sir, I
have never broadeast,’’ and “I am stammering,”’
like Lance Corporal Bruce, British Forces and I,
myself, pretended that I could not speak English
or understand it well enough, and also a few others,
whom I do not recall by name. To all this Uno said
that he had nothing to do with that; we had to
broadeast. The scoreboard was put in the officers’
vs. United States of America 487
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
room and Uno himself marked off on that board
how many commentaries were turned in; how many
were approved; how many were broadcast, and
other activities, and later, much later, when we got
our first Red Cross packages this scoreboard was
used as the determination of who would get Red
Cross packages, and who would not.)
@. When did you receive your first Red Cross
package ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. If I remember well I got my first Red Cross
package in the end of 1944.)
Q. Was that the first time Red Cross packages
were seen around the camp?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Objection sustained.
A. That was the first I had seen in my life.
@. Was it or was it not intact?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial and
incompetent. [16]
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. The first was intact.)
Q. How about the subsequent ones ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent and
immaterial.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. They had chocolate missing, cigarettes miss-
ing. As I was very fond of Camel cigarettes, I was
offered by one of the girls working for Tsuneishi
488 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
to swap the Camels for Chesterfields because her
brother liked Chesterfields better, which he smoked
before the war. )
@. Did these prisoners of war ever receive any
hospital treatment when they were sick?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as too general, in-
competent, irrelevant and immaterial.
Mr. Collins: This relates directly to the matter
of Major Cousens, if your Honor please.
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
(A. There were only two occasions, one occasion
when a fellow got hospital treatment; in thé case
of Cousens who got a heart attack in the studio.
They brought him back to the camp and upon con-
sultation he was transferred to a hospital and when
he left Uno said: ‘‘Thank God that bastard won’t
live long any more.’’)
Q. When was that, if you recall? I am referring
to the time when Cousens became ull.
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. It must have been in 1945. I would say in
the middle or little before the middle of 1945.)
Q. Was that the year the war ended or before
that?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. It was the year the war ended.) [17]
vs. United States of America 489
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
Q. Oh, incidentally, were you prisoners of war
preparing scripts that had a double meaning ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial, not relating to the Zero
Hour.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. As soon as we were told to write our own
stuff I know that all of them, with the exception of
Provoo and Streiter, each and everyone of us tried
to inject as much double meanings and information
in the scripts as possible. )
@. Have you any reason to believe that the in-
formation you conveyed in the broadcast was re-
ceived by the American or allied forces?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial, and hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Mr. Tamba: Line 24 on the next page, Mr.
Collins.
Mr. Collins: I will direct your Honor’s atten-
tion to the fact that the answer there relates to
what Major Cousens did in connection with that
matter, in connection with the question propounded.
Mr. DeWolfe: It is wholly a collateral matter.
The defendant’s name is not mentioned. There is a
lot of hearsay in it.
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
(A. I could only tell you what I know from
myself. It was after I came to Manila I was inter-
rogated several times by officers from CIC and one
490 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
of them, I do not recall his name, told me that we
fellows had done a mighty good job; that it was
appreciated ; that they had tried to come in contact
with us by broadcasting short wave to us so as to
get a better contact. However that they did not
have any confidence in those tryings because they
suspected us not to be able to receive, and after-
wards I know only of one occasion which was rather
touching to. It was in August we got a big air raid
and were surprised there were no bombs dropped
but leaflets. We got some leaflets from one Japa-
nese who brought it to us with a rather significant
remark that these leaflets ‘‘were exact opposites
from what the people back home actually intended
to tell us,’? I mean the [18] leaflet showed a pre-
pared rice table and on one side of the rice table
was one big mistake according to Japanese custom
because the chopsticks were on the right side in-
stead of front, and there were a couple of other
mistakes. I brought this leaflet to Cousens and dis-
cussed it with him and he had a little experience
about the Orientals and I had a little experience,
aud we thought it might be a good idea that they
should pay more attention to this because the Jap-
anese were extremely conscious of the customs and
we finally decided, after a long stroll in the court-
yard, that I should write a commentary and bring
it over the air the next morning, if possible, and
convey all the information to the Allies. I wrote
a draft and Cousens corrected it and the next morn-
vs. Umted States of America 491
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
ing I gave this piece to Domato who brought it to
the office and told me about two hours later: ‘‘Okay,
Nick, you go on the air.’’ Two days later we got
another air raid and again leaflets, and I got hold
of a leaflet through Parkyns who brought one from
the studio, and on those leaflets the chopsticks were
placed in front and the flower vase was standing in
the correct place. )
Q. In other words, the script which you pre-
pared called attention to the fact that the original
leaflet was erroneous according to Japanese
etiquette ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, sir.) .
Q. What kind of script did you write? Covering
what kind of subject ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as not connected
with the issues in this case and incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. You mean generally ?)
Q. Yes.
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that question; incom-
petent, irrelevant and immaterial, the same matter.
The Court: The objection is sustained.
(A. Cooking lessons; talks to the women and
once in a while a [19] political commentary. )
Q. I am referring to the chopsticks. What kind
of script did you use to tell the American forces
492 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
about the mistake they made in the rice table setting
according to Japanese custom.
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I started telling them that the Japanese
housewife had a hard time to get along with the ra-
tions they got; that they had a still harder time to
please their husbands but nevertheless they found
a way to please their husbands by cleaning the
house by the time the man came home and taking
the utmost care with the table arrangement so that
it was perfect because the Japanese men were stick-
ing to the customs and they want the rice table to
be prepared according to the old customs; the chop-
sticks arranged just right, and I repeated that once
more at the end of the commentary.)
Q. Camp Bunka was never bombed, was it?
A. No, sir. :
Q. Was the area in the immediate vicinity of
Camp Bunka bombed ? Av ao, si
Q. How far did the bombings take place with
relation to the Bunka?
A. The exact bombings never came any further
than the university well on the safe distance from
the camp because there is a street in between and
in the front street Kanda street.
Q. Is it significant to you that Camp Bunka was
never bombed ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as calling for a
vs. United States of America 493
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
conclusion; incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial,
not related to any issue in this ease.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Well, we hope that—at least some of us be-
lieved that our broadcasts were listened to by au-
thorities and that they guessed our camp was
there. )
Q. Was there any landmark about the place that
you used? [20]
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. We used in a couple of scripts the smoke-
stack which stands almost in the middle of Bunka.)
Q. Now, at Bunka you prisoners were quartered
in the back portion of the camp? .
A. Yes, sir.
@. What was in the front portion ?
A. That was occupied by the officers, from
Tsuneishi and his superiors.
Q. Can you describe Major Tsuneishi to us with
regard to his manners and his stature ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as too general;
incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial; not related
to the issues in this case.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Small Japanese fellow; typical army officer ;
arrogant, obviously suffering from an inferiority
complex before white men. ‘'ried to conceal that by
acting militarily.)
494 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
Q. Did you ever see him shake or rattle his
sword ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. That was his usual custom.)
@. Was that true likewise of Hamamoto?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as irrelevant and in-
competent.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Hamamoto had some more powers because
he had more physical bearing, but otherwise had
far less intelligence than T'suneishi. Tsuneishi was
more or less to be regarded as the brain while Ha-
mamoto was to be regarded as a dumb fellow.)
Q. Did you talk with Cousens and Ince and
others from time to time, about the broadcast and
attempt to give information to the allies over the
air ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial, and too general. [21]
The Court: Objection sustained.
Mr. Collins: This bears directly upon the testi-
mony of both Cousens and Ince, if your Honor
please, concerning what they were endeavoring
to do. :
Mr. DeWolfe: It does not say it is with refer-
ence to the Zero Hour program. It does not men-
tion the time. It has other people in there. To me
it definitely refers to another program. There is no
vs. Umted States of America 495
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
showing it has anything to do with the program
_ with which the defendant was involved.
Mr. Collins: You are assuming something.
The Court: The Court has ruled. The objection
is sustained.
(A. We had several conferences about it. We
were always planning to use the information we got
into the scripts. )
Q. Lt. Schenk, you had no part in the Zero
Hour, is that correct ?
A. Yes, that is correct:
Q. And, therefore, you are not in a position to
testify as to Iva D’Aquino, as to what she did on
the Zero Hour ? A. No, sir.
@. Did you ever have a discussion with Cousens
about the work he was doing in training an-
nouncers ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as calling for
hearsay ; incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: The objection is sustained.
Mr. Collins: It relates to the training even of
the defendant.
The Court: The Court has ruled. The objection
is Sustained. It is clearly hearsay.
(A. Cousens told us that he was trying to get
hold of some—to train some people who were able
to convey in seripts that double meaning as good as
possible and when I asked once if the double mean-
ing is not the same no matter how you pronounce
it, he said, no, in particular to a man who has to
496 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
listen the double meaning becomes valuable by the
pronounciation and articulation. [22]
Q. Lt. Schenk, you lived in the Orient for a
number of years? A. Yes.
®. How many? nd Up to now about 22.
Q. Did Uno come into the broadcasting room
with the prisoners of war ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as immaterial, no
showing that it has anything to do with the Zero
Hour program, too remote; incompetent, irrelevant
and immaterial.
The Court: It has to do with the Zero Hour. I
will allow it.
Mr. DeWolfe: I said there is no showing of
that.
The Court: The question embodies that. Read
the question.
Q. Did Uno come into the broadcasting room
with the prisoners of war? A. Always.
Q. Where would he be sitting when you were
broadcasting ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to it as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial. It had nothing to do with
the Zero Hour program. For instance, this witness
has already testified on the last page he is not in
a position to testify as to Iva D’Aquino as to what
she did on the Zero Hour. He had no part on the
Zero Hour himself, this witness, so obviously he
must be talking about some other program. It does
not relate to the issues involved in this case.
vs. United States of America 497
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Mostly across the man who was on the air.)
@. And what, if anything, was he doing?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Guarding us in regard to the script.) [23]
~Q. Did you know Mr. Oki?
A. I now a name Oki. I would not be able to
say, ‘This is Oki, and this is Mr. Yoshi.””
Q. When did you meet a man by the name of
Mr. Oki, if you recall? A. In the studio.
@. Did you speak to him? A. No, sir.
Q. Did he speak to you?
A. All those Japanese around there would once
in a while speak to us, and the kind ones, so to say,
I remember quite well because their way of speak-
ing was different, all the others using more or less
ordering form of speaking. |
Q. Did Oki lead you to believe that he could
not speak English ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as calling for a
conclusion.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I know one occasion when I asked a ques-
tion about needles necessary for the correct record-
ing, I got the impression he did not understand.
Later on I heard from Henshaw that that fellow
had been born in the States or had been in the
States and knew better English than even I did,
498 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
and he said something like ‘‘ You better watch that
fellow.’’
Lt. Schenk, Mr. Storey, in one of his previous
depositions, asked about supplying women to Major
Cousens. Do you know something about that oc-
casion ?
A. When Major Cousens came in our camp, and
he and I became very intimate, he told me that pre-
viously they had been located in the Dai Iti Hotel
and that they always brought women there, and
they would say: ‘‘Won’t you come along with us,’
we are going there and there,’’ and that he once,
I believe it was once, that one of the fellows went
to Yokohama and that they insisted that he take
a girl but that he had only danced with that girl
or just sat down and drank something and after
he went home. Personally I know Cousens was of
too high moral standards to forget the fact that he
was married. Besides that I rather doubt that any-
body living under the conditions we were living
under could stand a woman. [24]
Q. Do you remember an occasion when prisoners
of war at Bunka Camp asked for a priest so that
they could have confession ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial. |
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. They asked for that repeatedly. )
Q. Did you ever receive the benefit of a priest?
us. United States of America 499
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as irrevelant and
incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. No, sir, we even asked permission to hold
ourselves a religious worship meeting, so to say,
which was absolutely forbidden.)
Q. Did some Japanese general come to that
camp when you first arrived?
A. We had several high ranking visitors.
@. Do you remember one general in particular
coming to the camp after Tsuneishi’s first speech ?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know who that general was ?
A. I am not quite sure about his name, but it
was not Arusi, it was Asaka, something like that.
I am not sure about the name.
Q. Do you know the Japanese name given to
Bunka Camp? A. Ne; sir.
Q. Was there any sign in Japanese outside of
the camp, indicating that it was some kind of in-
stitute ? AY Wo, sir
Q. Did you ever ask the intervention of any
neutral government to assist the prisoners of war
in that camp?
A. We expressed several times the wish to see
a representative from a neutral country.
Q. Were you given that privilege?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial and not relevant to the
issues in this case, the Zero Hour program.
500 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino |
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
The Court: The objection is sustained.
(A. Never, sir.) [25]
@. You mentioned the name Yoshi. What did
he do there?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial, having nothing to do
with the Zero Hour program.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. He was a young fellow, young Japanese who
spoke rather fluent English, I should say, Ameri-
can, who told that he had been in America to buy
scrap iron. He was attached to our camp as a kind
of a spy and after some time being in our camp he
told us: ‘‘You fellows better not talk about any-
thing in my presence which could do harm to you
because after all it is my job, do you understand ?’’
And we understood. )
Q@. Did you ever report T'suneishi to your gov-
ernment after the war?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as immaterial
and incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I reported him to my government, Major
Tsuneishi, Hamamoto, Uno, and Ikeda, as war
eriminals. )
Mr. DeWolfe: I do not offer the cross examina-
tion. If your Honor wishes me to state the Gov-
ernment’s position with reference to the applica-
bility of rule 15, Federal Rules of Criminal
Procedure, subdivision e, on that matter, I will.
vs. United States of America 001
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
The Court: I am not familiar with it. What
is 1t?
Mr. DeWolfe: I just do not offer the cross ex-
amination. Apparently the new criminal rules for
the first time have a specific provision with refer-
ence to the taking of depositions, as your Honor
is well aware, and there are two pertinent parts
with reference to the matter I am now speaking
about. Rule 15, subdivision e at the top says:
‘‘At the trial or upon any hearing, a part or all
of the deposition, so far as otherwise admissible —
under the rules‘of evidence, may be used if it
appears: a
and then there are certain contingencies which must
occur:
‘‘he witness is not available. The witness must
be dead or outside [26] the jurisdiction of the
United States.’’
Later on at the end of the rule there appears
the following:
“It only a part of a foaeen is offered in evi-
dence by a party, an adverse party may require
him to offer all of it which is relevant to the part
offered and any party may offer other parts.”’
It is to some extent at least, similar to companion
provisions with reference to that matter as to the
use of parts of a deposition by parties litigant be-
fore a United States court as mentioned in the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Of course, we all
know that depositions for a defendant were allow-
202 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
able under certain circumstances prior to the pro-
mulgation of these Federal Rules of Criminal
Procedure, but now the rules with reference to the
use and the taking of depositions in a criminal
proceeding pending in a United States Court have
been. crystallized, set down in writing, and ap-
proved by the Supreme Court of the United States,
and I suppose they have the force and effect of
statute and law, and my impression of them is that
either party can offer a part of a deposition. I
therefore do not offer the cross-examination of this
witness.
The Court: Proceed.
Mr. Collins: Now if your Honor please, the de-
fendant wishes to introduce the cross-examination
of the witness into evidence, together with exhibits
that were introduced into the deposition by stipu-
lation, and attached to the deposition by counsel
for the prosecution, Mr. Storey; and in addition
to that, we desire to offer in the redirect examina-
tion by Mr. Tamba and the recross-examination by
Mr. Storey.
The Court: J have never run into this situation
before.
Mr. DeWolfe: I have never, either, sir.
Mr. Collins: Neither have we, if your Honor
please, but here is a deposition which is taken
abroad under rather peculiar and extraordinary
circumstances, and it was the only method by which
the defendant was able to obtain the testimony of
vs. United States of America 003
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
witnesses abroad. I may state that the matters of
eross-examination are directly [27] relevant and
pertinent to the vital issues that are involved in this
ease, and since a portion of the deposition, that 1s,
the direct examination, has been offered, if counsel
for the prosecution is not going to read the cross-
examination and the redirect and recross-examina-
tion, then the defendant insists upon the right to
having this matter introduced into evidence, the
testimony together with the exhibits themselves,
which were offered merely for identification, but
which were introduced in evidence by counsel for
the prosecution in connection with the taking of
this deposition.
Mr. DeWolfe: Could I make one more statement
in reference to procedure? The government takes
the position that Mr. Collins has the right to offer
this other part, subject to any objections which the
United States seeks to interpose before your
Honor’s ruling on that. On that matter the rules
are apparently such as to give him the right to do
that.
The Gourt: Proceed.
Mr. Collins: Yes. This is the cross-examination
of the witness Nicolaas Schenk, by Mr. Storey;
reading:
(Thereupon the reading of the cross-exami-
nation of the deposition of Nicolaas Schenk
was commenced, the questions being read by
Mr. Collins and the answers by Mr. Tamba.)
O04 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
@. Did your government institute an investiga-
tion as a result of your reporting these men as war
criminals ? A. Never did, sir.
Mr DeWolfe: Object to that as being incom-
petent, irrelevant and immaterial.
Mr. Collins: That is cross-examination, if your
Honor please, by the attorney for the prosecution,
and.it seems to me that under the circumstances
they would be barred from voicing objections.
Mr. DeWolfe: Well, it is with reference to a
matter that has gone out on direct, sir, in the case
in chief, gone out. [28]
The Court: Read the question again.
Mr. Collins: Did your government institute an
investigation as a result of your reporting these
men as war criminals?
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
@. Were these men ever tried as war criminals?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as being incom-
petent, irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
(A. No, sir.)
@. Approximately how many Allied prisoners
were in Japanese custody at the time you were
selected for radio work?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
immaterial and irrelevant.
The Court: Radio work?
Mr. Collins: Yes.
The Court: On the Zero Hour?
vs. United States of America 505
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
Mr. Collins: Well, it doesn’t specify that it was
on the Zero Hour.
The Court:' The objection will be sustained.
(A. When we were brought to Omori we were
gathered with about sixty people.)
@. Do you have any idea how many allied pris-
oners of war were altogether in the custody of the
Japanese to work for the radio?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
immaterial and irrelevant.
Mr. Collins: It is preliminary, if nothing else.
The Court: Unless it is connected with the Zero
Hour, I will sustain the objection.
Mr. Collins: It doesn’t so appear; it is a gen-
eral answer. But it does relate to this, if I may
direct your Honor’s attention to it. The condi-
tions under which people were generally selected
for radio work. And I think it would pertain to
the very testimony that is connected—it is con-
nected with the testimony of Major Tsuneishi, who
stated the circumstances under which people were
selected from various areas, to be brought to Japan
for that area. [29]
The Court: Too general, the objection will be
sustained.
(A. All over Japan?)
Q. Yes.
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(ee Wo; Sit)
506 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
Q. One hundred thousand? One hundred fifty —
thousand ?
Mr. DeWolfe: . Object to that as incompetent,
immaterial and irrelevant and having nothing to
do with the Zero Hour program in Radio Tokyo.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. It could have been any number.)
Q. How many prisoners of war were at Camp
Bunka?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
immaterial and irrelevant.
The Court: Objection sustained. Proceed.
(A. In Bunka we had around twenty-five.)
Q. Twenty-five was the average while you were
there?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
immaterial and irrelevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Mr. Collins: The answer incorporated Major
Cousens and Captain Ince, if your Honor please.
The Court: I think there was some testimony
in the record about 12 or 15 or something.
Mr. Collins: It would inerease to 25 or 27,
minus 2, I think.
The Court: Well, whether there was 25 or 50,
what relation has it to the issues involved in this
case ?
Mr. Collins: Has your Honor ruled?
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
(A. When we came we had only a few but we
vs. United States of America 507
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
got twenty later. Cousens and Ince were brought
in, and later five other people were brought in, and
later one was brought in, which made it about
twenty-five.) [30]
@. Did any prisoner of war refuse to do broad-
easting for the Japanese after he had received the
order to broadcast?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant, not related to the issues in this ease.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Mr. Collins: It relates—I was going to point
out, if your Honor please, that it relates to’ the ques-
tion of the orders that were given to these people
and the circumstances under which they were com-
pelled to broadcast.
The Court: What relation have those orders to
the issues involved here?
Mr. Collins: It has this relation, it relates di-
rectly to the orders given to Captain Ince and
Major Cousens, who were detained at Bunka, who
were there ordered to broadcast by Major Tsuneishi
and by others.
The Court: On the Zero Hour?
Mr. Collins: That was on the Zero Hour, yes,
your Honor.
The Court: Is there anything there connect-
ing that up with the Zero Hour?
Mr. Collins: No, save and except the general
orders given to the prisoners of war at Bunka,
508 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
among whose numbers were Major Cousens and
Captain Ince, and as to what they must do.
The Court: Objection will be sustained.
(A. Yes, sir. Several times. It was not di-
rectly refused because of fear of dire punishment
by way of execution but by trying to bring up some
points which could dismiss a prisoner from broad-
casting. That one instance when Shattles told Uno:
‘*T would rather get shot than broadcast this stuff,”’
he was taken aside by Uno and had a severe talk
with him and he came to us erying and erying
‘“What shall I do? What shall I do?’’ and the
final thing that we thought and we told him that
no government would accept such a broadcast as
_ treason because of the fact that this was just too
obvious.) [31]
®. Isn’t it a fact that George Williams, a Brit-
ish subject, refused outright to do propaganda
broadcasts ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, im-
material and irrelevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. It was not spoken of as broadcast. Wil-
liams refused to cooperate before we even knew
what was going to happen.)
Q. Was Willams killed as a result of that re-
fusal?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, im-
material and irrelevant. .
vs. United States of America 509
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
The Court: Same ruling, objection will be sus-
tained.
(A. Up to the end of the war, when I came to
Manila, I never knew nothing else but that Wil-
liams was killed. In Manila I heard he was sent
to another camp and held there.)
Q. Captain Kalbfleisch refused also later to do
. broadeasting, did he not?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. I don’t know whether it was a question of
refusal. )
@. He was transferred from the camp?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. He was transferred suddenly and it was
told to me, or to us, rather, that it was because
of sabotage. I believe Uno accused him of writing
double meaning scripts.)
(). Was he executed for this?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, im-
material and irrelevant.
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
(A. I did not know any better until I met him
in Manila, after the end of the war.)
Q. At the time you saw him after the war, he
was all right?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: The objection will be sustained. [32]
o10 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
(A. He was, yes, sir. JI wonder if it is of any
value if I add that the man’s belongings were
standing in the camp for quite a number of weeks
and I personally asked Uno, just to find out what
happened to Kalbfleisch, isn’t it necessary that we
send that stuff to the boy, after all he will need it,
and Uno said: ‘‘No, he will not need it.’’ This
gave me the absolute belief he was executed.)
Q. Was George Uno transferred from Camp
Bunka while you were there?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as not related to the
issues involved in this case and incompetent, irrele-
vant and immaterial.
Mr. Collins: I may point out that the testimony
was that Uno was one of the watchers that was
sent to watch the Zero Hour program while Cou-
sens and Ince were on that program.
Mr. DeWolfe: Now they are asking, your
Honor, as I remember about what he did at Camp
Bunka and whether he was transferred from Camp
Bunka to some other place.
Mr. Collins: Yes, whether he was taken away
from the camp.
The Court: Whether he was or not has no rele-
vancy in this case. The objection will be sustained.
(A. Buddy Uno left the camp, I believe, in
1944, but I am not quite sure.)
Q. Are you aware of the fact that he was trans-
ferred from Camp Bunka because he mistreated
Naval Lt. Henshaw ?
vs. United States of America oll
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as irrelevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. No.)
Q. It was not well known he was relieved be-
cause he mistreated one of the prisoners of war.
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as irrelevant and
incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. No.) |
@. Was any other person connected with the
camp relieved because he slapped or mistreated the
prisoners of war, to your knowledge?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Not to my knowledge.) [83] )
Q. Who was the protecting power for the Al-
lied interests in Japan during the war?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as irrelevant.
The Court: Who was that?
Mr. Collins: Protecting power for the Allied
interests in Japan.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. If I am not mistaken, the Swedish Lega-
tion acted as the representatives of the Nether-
lands Government and the Swiss Legation repre-
sented the American and English, I am not quite
sure. )
Q. Did you ever submit a formal request to
Major Tsuneishi, who was in charge of that camp,
912 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
to see a representative of the Swedish Govern-
ment ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant.
The Court: What is the name of this witness
that is being examined ?
Mr. Collins: Schenk, Nicolass Schenk, Lieuten-
ant Nicolass Schenk.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Mr. DeWolfe: He is a Dutch prisoner of war,
I think.
(A. There was no such a possibility to submit
such a request. )
Q. Did you ever attempt to submit such a re-
quest to Tsuneishi? |
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as not having
any bearing on the issues involved, incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
Q. Did you talk to Tsuneishi?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as imcompetent,
irrelevant. |
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Never got the chance.)
Q. Did you ever talk to Tsuneishi at all?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Never got the chance.) [34]
@. Did you ever protest to Major Tsuneishi
about misappropriation of Red Cross parcels which
vs. United States of America 913
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
were supposed to be distributed in the camp?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I protested to the interpreter—that means
to say protest is too strong an expression. I told
the interpreter that to my belief there were more
Red Cross packages across the way, and whether
he would be so kind as to call Major T'suneishi’s
attention to that?)
Q. Did you ever request through the interpreter
to have an interview with Major ‘I'suneishi?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as irrelevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. These requests were always——)
Q. Did you ever make such a request?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Oh, yes.)
Q. After you had made this request to have
the Red Cross packages distributed, were they dis-
tributed ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
GA. ‘No,-sit®)
Q. They were not distributed at all after that
request was made?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling. The objection will
be sustained.
o14 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
(A. They were distributed to us as a kind of
reward, but quite a while later.)
Q. What were the prisoners of war doing in
Camp Bunka?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. You mean daily activity ?)
Q. No, what were you, all of you, doing there?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to as incompetent, irrele-
vant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Well, we had to take care of the camp. I,
myself, of course, of the drawing of supplies and
preparing them, and the others had their own ac-
tivities, such as cleaning up the place, making the
baths for the Japanese.)
@. Were these prisoners of war broadcasting
propaganda for the Japanese Government?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to it as immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. All of us were connected in one way or an-
other with the broadcast. )
@. And the scripts were written by the pris-
oners of war and were designed to be propaganda
against the Allied forces?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant.
The Court: Unless it is connected up with the
Zero Hour, the objection will have to be sustained.
vs. United States of America 515
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
All these questions that are being propounded, the
jury must regard as not evidence, and not to be
considered for any purpose in this case.
(A. We got a certain subject and we got point
out what we should write about.)
Mr. Collins: What is the next line, Mr. Tamba?
Mr. Tamba: TI think it is 14, unless I got lost.
@. And the scripts were written by the pris-
oners of war and were designed to be propaganda
against the Allied forces?
Mr. Collins: Did I just read that?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as irrelevant and
immaterial.
The Court: I sustained the objection to that,
unless it is connected up with the Zero Hour.
Mr. Collins: Well, we are endeavoring to con-
nect that, if your Honor please, and we think that
there is already testimony in the record
The Court: Well, it may or may not develop.
Unless they are connected up, it is clearly my duty
to sustain the objections to them. [36]
@. But it was propaganda?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent, ir-
relevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. It was always more or less propaganda. )
Q. You have testified that the prisoners of war
were putting a double meaning into their broad-
casts ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
516 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
The Court: What broadeasts?
Mr. Collins: This related just generally to the
prisoner of war broadcasts, to all the prisoner of
war broadcasts, not to any one particular one, but
to all prisoner of war broadcasts.
Mr. DeWolfe: That is why it is objectionable,
SIT.
The Court: The objection will have to be sus-
tained.
Mr. Collins: I am pointing out, if your Honor
please, that if the double meanings are being put
into all the prisoner of war broadcasts, pursuant to
-an agreement or understanding of the prisoners of
war, then it includes also the Zero Hour and such
other programs as the prisoners of war were com-
pelled to broadcast on. |
The Court: The objection will have to be sus-
tained.
(A. Yes.)
Q. Give us all the examples, if you can remem-
ber them, of scripts with double meanings. You
need not repeat the one you gave to Mr. Tamba
with regard to the rice table.
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to it, incompetent, irrele-
vant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I think it is putting quite a strain on a
man to recall that, but for instance I recall that
in the scripts that were supposed to be prepared
by Henshaw and Cousens and others, that we tried
us. United States of America O17
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
to get across how exactly the prisoners of war were
treated by the Japanese; what happened to the
Red Cross supplies, and what, in general, the be-
haviour of the Japanese was.)
Q. Tell us how you got that into the scripts?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant.
The Court: Objection sustained. [387]
(A. It is impossible for me to reeall that ex-
actly. I cannot tell you exactly that the seript
contained that and that.)
Q. In other words, the only example you can
remember is the one you gave Mr. Tamba?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection your Honor.
The Court: Objection sustained.
CA. Wes.)
@. You have testified that you were in charge
of the kitchen at Camp Bunka for a while. Were
you relieved of that duty later?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes,'sir.)
Q. What was the reason given for relieving you
from this duty?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Because they caught a couple of my boys
stealing. We were on a stealing party to get food.)
Q.' Did any of the other prisoners of war ever
accuse you of misappropriating food in the kitchen 2
018 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as hearsay, eall-
ing for a conclusion, incompetent, immaterial and
irrelevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. You mean the prisoners of war accusing
me?)
@. Yes.
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(&. ANo;seir.)
Q. Do you recall an incident that happened on
February 24, 1945, when there was quite an inves-
tigation of activities in the kitchen?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. You mean by the Japanese?)
Q. Yes, when the American prisoners, the other
prisoners of war accused you of taking food out of
the kitchen?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as immaterial and
incompetent. [38]
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Never from the American prisoners of war.)
Q. From any prisoners of war?
Mr. De Wolfe: ‘The same objection, sir.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. No.)
Q. Can you recall the date that you were re-
lieved from your duties in the kitchen?
vs. United States of America o19
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
Mr. De Wolfe: Objected to as immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. That, if I am not mistaken, was in ’45,
somewhere around the beginning of 1945.)
Q. You have mentioned in these orders that were
given to the prisoners of war at the camp that if the
prisoners of war did not cooperate with the pro-
gram they would be executed. Was the word ‘‘exe-
euted”’ used or, that if you did not work, your life
would not be guaranteed ?
Mr. De Wolfe: Objected to as incompetent,
immaterial and irrelevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. They used the expression ‘‘your life would
not be guaranteed.’’)
Q. In other words, they did not say you would
be executed ?
Mr. De Wolfe: Same objection, your Honor.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. lIasked Uno for their interpretation of sev-
eral Japanese words and he told me that I had to
understand the meaning of ‘‘nothing is guaranteed”’
and ‘‘your life is not guaranteed’”’ in the way the
Japanese regarded the prisoners of war and later
he explained that in detail to the whole assembly
of prisoners of war that prisoners of war was an
unknown thing to Japanese, and, therefore, the
prisoners of war were called by the name of ‘‘horyo”’
which also, according to him, meant to express the
lowest type of criminal. [39]
520 Ivalkuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
@. Did you know the literal translation of the
orders given by superiors, given at Camp Bunka?
Mr. De Wolfe: Answer it.
A. No, sir.
Q. Whenever you were given an official order,
was it ever interpreted to the prisoners of war that
they would be executed if they did not cooperate.
A. I got that impression.
Mr. De Wolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant.
The Court: What was the answer, he got that
impression ?
Mr. Tamba: He got that impression.
The Court: The objection will be sustained, and
let it go out and let the jury disregard it.
Q. Did they say that?
Mr. De Wolfe: Object to that as hearsay, in-
competent, irrelevant and immaterial, has nothing
to do with the Zero Hour, as this witness has testi-
fied he didn’t participate in the Zero Hour, didn’t
know. anything about it.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. No, sir, not in so many words. )
Q. You have testified that on the occasions you
saw Major Tsuneishi, he was always in uniform and
was wearing a sword. Was the usual uniform of
the Japanese officer of field rank, the carrying of
a sword?
Mr. De Wolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
immaterial and irrelevant.
vs. United States of America o21
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I don’t know,»sir.)
Q. Was anyone ever killed in Camp Bunka for
not carrying out orders in Camp Bunka?
Mr. De Wolfe: Objected to as incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. No, sir.)
Q. Was Major Tsuneishi ever present when you
saw any of the prisoners of war at Camp Bunka
being mistreated? [40]
Mr. De Wolfe: You may answer if you want.
A. I do not recall clearly such an occasion.
Q. What is your answer to my question?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did you know Miss Toguri at all during the
time you were working at the radio station?
A. I know quite a few of the girls, but not by
name, just nicknames, like Miss Toguri was called
and known by the name ‘‘Anne,’’ and so were all
the other girls, I believe. I believe I saw her a
couple of times at the studio around there.
Q. Did you ever see Miss Toguri broadcast ?
A. No, sir. ji
@. Did you ever hear one of her broadcasts ?
A. No, sir.
Q. What time did your program go on the air
when you were broadcasting ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Will you read that question
again ? .
Q. (By Mr. Collins): What time did your pro-
gram go on the air when you were broadcasting?
522 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as immaterial, it
is not the Zero Hour program.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Our program went on the air, I believe, be-
tween 12 and 1:00.) |
Q. What time did the Zero Hour go on the air?
A. Some time in the afternoon, some time
around four or five o’clock.
Q. Did you remain at the studio—at the radio
station after you finished broadcasting ?
A. We remained for about half an hour, some-
times an hour, and then we went. It all depended
on whether our escort was there.
@. Were you ever present at the radio station as
late as six or seven o’clock?
A. I, myself, never.
Q. Have you seen the defendant since the war,
Miss Toguri? A. No. [41]
@. In other words, the only times you can ever
remember seeing her are the two or three times you
have testified to here? A. Yes.
Q. At any time since the end of the war, have
you contacted any people in an effort to prepare
the evidence for Miss Toguri’s defense ?
A. No, sir. May I know a little bit more about
it? I say, no, but about a few weeks ago I got a
letter from the lawyers firm Fred Collins in San
Francisco, I believe, asking me if I can give answer
to certain questions as to how her employment arose.
vs. United States of America J20
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
So and so on. Later I was called by Mr. Tamba.
That is the only two occasions.
@. Since the war you have never approached
any persons who were formerly connected with the
radio station in an effort to prepare a defense for
Miss Toguri? A. No, sir.
Q. Do you know a person by the name of Lilly
Ghevenian ? A. Lillian?
Q. Do you recall writing her a letter suggesting
to get people together and prepare a defense for
Miss Toguri? A. Yes.
@. Then the answer you gave me a little while
ago is not true?
A. I wanted to have some more information
Oi it.
@. What did you say in that letter?
A. I don’t recall but I got a letter from the
lawyer and I recalled that after the war we had
an investigation here about Tokyo Rose, they called
this girl, and I saw the picture of the girl in the
newspaper and I recalled that face as having seen
once or maybe twice. I am pretty strong in re-
membering faces, and I immediately connected this
girl with the girl I knew at that time as Ann. I
knew from Cousens that that girl had been of great
help to him, with the result that I tried to get—
recollect everything, and later when I got that letter
from the lawyers’ firm, that immediately remem-
bered that girl working there continually in Radio
Tokyo [42] and she must be known by some other
524 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
people whom I knew, like Lillian and Jane Sagoyan.
I knew just about the address from Jean Sagoyan
and I thought I better write that a girl a note so
as the lawyers could get in touch with them, and if
she would be of any value to use it. I don’t re-
member what I wrote to that.girl.
(During the reading of the aforesaid deposi-
tion, the following occurred:)
Mr. Collins: And then questions by Mr. Tamba.
This would be redirect.
The Court: Will we be able to conclude?
Mr. Collins: It is about six or seven pages, your
Honor. |
The Court: The jurors may be excused until
2 :00.
(Thereupon a recess was taken until 2:00
p.m. this date.)
Mr. Tamba: Line 3, page 26, Mr. Collins.
Mr. Collins: ‘‘Mr. Tamba: I demand that if
you have a letter written by this witness, that he
be shown it before he be requested to testify as to
what he wrote in it.”
Mr. DeWolfe: I have not any such letter now
in our possession. I have never seen it that I re-
eall, if the demand is renewed.
Mr. Collins: J assume that the letter was not
produced. The letter was ignored. You can see
that from the nature of the question.
Q. You have testified previously that you saw
vs. Umited States of America 529
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
that girl once or twice, and that you did not know
what she was doing at the radio station?
A. Well, we knew from all the Nisei girls and
the Nisei boys that they were broadcasting.
Q. Why were you so anxious to help someone
who collaborated with the Japanese government
without knowing more about it?
Mr. DeWolfe: I will object to that as incom-
petent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Now we come to a very critical point. I
have suffered quite a bit from this war and I know
that all these Nisei boys and Nisei girls here in
Japan, whether they come out here of their own
free will, or forced to come back, did suffer quite a
bit and it is not up to me to say whether the person
has committed treason or not. Treason to me is
when a person does something for gain, to get
something out of it for personal benefit or out of
a belief. While I personally did not believe that
anybody, a Nisei boy or Nisei girl working in Radio
Tokyo at that time, which the Japanese regarded
as neither fish nor fowl, would be regarded as trea-
son—to commit treason.
Q. Do. you know whether or not Miss Toguri
was paid at Radio Tokyo?
A. Ido not care what she was paid.
Q. In other words, you are willing to defend
her without knowing more than that?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that, Your Honor.
026 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
The Court: Objection sustained.
A. I would be willing to defend her only on the
fact already that she helped the prisoners of war
by giving information or anything else.
Q. Did you mention that trip to the United
States in this letter to these people that they would
help with the defense?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Mr. Tamba: I again demand that if counsel
has a letter written by this witness that it be shown
to him before he is requested to give any further
testimony as to the contents of such letter.
(Letter dated Tokyo, 24 February, 1949, ad-
dressed: ‘‘Dear Lill and Jenny’’ was shown to
witness by Mr. Storey.)
(A. Yes.)
Q. How did you propose to arrange this trip to
the United States for them?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent
and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I am willing to give them myself some few
hundred dollars. [44] This girl Jenny Sagoyan was
so good to my fellow-prisoner, to one of my mates,
and did so much to keep him alive, and I am willing
to pay a certain amount of money to get that girl
to the States.) ,
Q. In other words, you are willing to go to any
effort to get that girl to the United States?
vs. United States of America o27
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. No, not to any effort, but I certainly feel
this is a part of my duty to help at least that girl
after what she has done, even if it has not been
done to myself. During that time we regarded our-
selves as so close together, we went through so
many things, that it was no difference whether it
was for me or anyone else, even Mark Streiter. )
‘“‘Mr. Story: The prosecution would like to offer
this letter as Government’s Exhibit ‘1’ in Schenk
deposition.
Mr. Tamba: No objection.’’
Mr. Tamba: The letter is appended to the dep-
osition, but I understand counsel has objected.
Mr. DeWolfe: I am not offering any letter.
Mr. Collins: It was a letter which the prosecu-
tion offered. Is it attached?
Mr. Tamba: It is attached to the original.
Mr. Collins: The letter which was attached as
Prosecution’s Exhibit 1 to this deposition reads as
follows:
Mr. DeWolfe: I will object to it. We did not
offer that exhibit, and if he offers it as part of the
cross-examination, we will object to it. We did not
offer any of the cross-examination. It is not proper.
Objection was sustained to the direct examination.
I take the position I am not offering any cross-
examination.
The Court: Submitted?
528 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
Mr. Collins: Yes.
The Court: Now for the purpose of the record,
you may indicate the purpose of this offer [44-A]
Mr. Collins: The purpose of this offer is to show
that a letter dated Tokyo, 24 February, 1949, ad-
dressed to Lt. Nicolaas Schenk, custodian officer.
Netherlands Legation, Genera] Headquarters, APO
500, care of Postmaster, San Francisco, California,
and addressed to ‘‘Dear Lil and Ginny,’’ and
signed by——
The Court: The best approach to that would be
to indicate in what manner this letter should go in
evidence, on what theory and what relation has it
to any issue in this case.
Mr. Collins: It relates to this, if Your Honor
please, this request for an appointment to com-
municate information in the story of Radio Tokyo
and to ask both of these persons, apparently Lil and
Ginny, if they would go to the United States and
also if they would contact all girls and boys who
are acquainted with ‘‘T’okyo Rose, and tell them to
communicate with the writer as soon as possible.
The Court: That has no place in this record.
The objection will be sustained to it.
Mr. Collins: What line were you on?
Mr. Tamba: We are on page 28, line 1, now.
Mr. Collins: Let the record show that on page
27 Mr. Tamba stated, after Mr. Storey offered Gov-
ernment’s Exhibit 1 attached to that deposition,
that he had no objection. Now redirect examination
by Mr. Tamba.
vs. United States of America 529
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
Q. You feel quite keenly about the experiences
you endured during the war?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as not proper
redirect. Cross-examination was not offered by the
United States.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, sir.)
Q. And you know that the girl you knew as
Ann did what she could for the prisoners of war?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as leading, not
proper redirect examination, incompetent, no cross-
examination by the Government.
The Court: Clearly calling for the conclusion
of the witness. The objection will be sustained.
(A. I am absolutely convinced that every Nisei
girl and every Nisei boy, if they had the opportu-
nity, would have helped us.
' Q. Do you remember the incident of the blanket
being brought to Camp Bunka?
Mr. Tamba: Any objection to that?
Mr. DeWolfe: No.
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know where it came from?
A. I wouldn’t be able to say it came from Ann,
Lillian or anyone else, but if I bring it in connection
to a person who got it, and whom that person knew
and was told to get in contact with, that I am
almost convinced that it was Ann’s.
Q. You know the blanket came to the camp?
me Wes.
030 - Iva Ikuko Toguni D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
Q. You also know about—you also no doubt
know, Lt. Schenk, that information concerning
Allied war news was supplied to Major Cousens.
A. I have said
Q. You also know, Lt. Schenk, that sometimes
food, items of food came to the camp?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And it is your belief that it came from Ann
and other Niseis? A. Yes, sir.
Mr. DeWolfe: That is calling for a conclusion.
The Court: His belief may go out. The objec-
tion is sustained.
Q. And you feel grateful for that?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that because he has
testified only as to his belief.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
@. And that is the reason you wrote this letter?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that for the same
reason.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Exactly.) [46]
Q. You saw me twice prior to today, Lt. Schenk?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And I asked you if you were willing to go
to the States to testify ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. And you said you would be willing to go
there ? A. Yes, sir.
Q. I did not want to go into this, but since Mr.
Storey went a little further, was the subject of
cannibalism discussed among you prisoners?
vs. Umted States of America 531
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent, ,
improper redirect.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
Q. Tell us about it.
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent
and immaterial.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. We were sitting on our bunks one night,
and a few of us had been punished by not eating
and I was able to steal a little bit out of the Jap-
anese ration and brought it to the people who had
been punished. I don’t remember the names, so
after a while we were getting into the discussion
‘‘suppose you and I would sit in an open boat with
nothing around us. We would be without food, so
what would we do. You would watch me, expecting
that I would kill you, and you say you would do
the same to me.’’ Whatever are their impressions,
and we discussed that problem, that subject from
all sides with the absolute belief that if it came
that far that each and everyone of us would kill the
other not so much for protection but to keep the
belly full.)
Q. When I interviewed you, you never gave me
the name of Lillian Sagoyan? i Woy 6m
@. I talked with you about what you knew about
the girls? A. That is correct, sir. [47]
Q. About this bath you mentioned to me, do you
know the name of the man who was repeatedly
532 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk.)
beaten for not taking care of the Japanese bath,
who was he?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: The objection is sustained.
(A. Larry Quilly.)
Q. Who beat him?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: The objection is sustained.
(A. Hamamoto and the sergeant of the Kempei-
tai.)
Q. Was that done frequently?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection to it.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Practically every day.)
@. When Uno left the camp, did he make a
speech and do you remember the contents or the
‘tone, or the general import of that speech?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as not bearing on
any issue in the ease.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. We held a kind of a bull session in which
he said that Major Cousens was that kind of a
character; that Ince was a poker player; that Ince
had to be very careful because the Japanese prob-
ably could—he meant to say something of the war,
that the time would not be far off when the Jap-
anese would stand from Ince just so much; that
Henshaw he regarded as a young fellow with ¢a-
us. United States of America O33
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
pacities but under the wrong leadership and by
leadership he meant Ince, as well as Cousens, and
he gave the description of everybody of us and left
us more or less in the belief that he was going out
to die for his country if it came so far because he
was a Japanese and he was very proud of it and I
believe he told us also what his brother had told him
when he left.) [48]
Q. ‘To whom did you ask—whom did you ask for
the privilege to see the Swedish Legation, if you
recall?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as irrelevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I am quite sure—I believe it was Osaki
whom I asked once to see the Swedish representa-
tive, or the Swiss representative. )
Q. Did you come here voluntarily this morning?
ma, Wes» sir.
Q. To testify in behalf of Miss Toguri?
A. Yes.
Mr. DeWolfe: ‘The recross-examination is not
offered by the Government.
Mr Collins: I will put the questions on re-
cross.
Recross-Examination
By Mr. Storey:
Q. Did you ever see Miss Toguri at Camp
Bunka? mm Io.
Q. Did Miss Toguri ever give you any food?
A. No.
Q. Did Miss Toguri ever give you any medicine?
Mr. Tamba: I do not find an answer to that.
O34 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Nicolaas Schenk. )
Mr. DeWolfe: I do not either.
Mr. Collins: Is that the end of it then?
Mr. Tamba: On the next page.
@. Did she ever pass on any news to you?
A. No, sir, not to me.
Mr. Collins: Is that the conclusion?
Mr. Tamba: Yes.
/s/ NICK SCHENK.
GOVERNMENT'S EXHIBIT “‘T”
IN SCHENK DEPOSITION
Tokyo, 24 February 1949
Lt. Nick Schenk
Custodian Officer
Netherlands Legation
General Liaison, GHQ.
APO 500, c/o P.M.
San Francisco, Cal.
Dear Lill and Jenny
I would appreciate it very much if both of you:
would give me an appointment as soon as possible.
The thing is I would like to have some additional
information in the old story of Radio-Tokyo, and if
possible I would like to have both of you getting
a change of going on a nice trip to the States.
I also would appreciate it if you could contact all
girls and boys who are acquanted with ‘‘Tokyo-
Rose’’ and tell them to call me as soon as possible.
The information I would like to have from them is
us. United States of America O30
everything what can be of Value for the defense of
that girl. So nobody has to fear a thing as it is
for the benefit of all. Expect to receive your call
soon.
Yours truly,
/s/ NICK SCHENK.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
American Vice Consul.
[ American Consular Service Seal. ]
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss.
CERTIFICATE
I, Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the
United States of America in and for Tokyo, Japan,
duly commissioned and qualified, acting under the
authority of a certain stipulation for taking oral
designations abroad, and upon order of the United
States District Court, made and entered March 22,
1949, in the Matter of United States of Ameriea,
Plaintiff, vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, Defend-
ant, pending in the Southern Division of the United
States District Court, for the Northern District of
California, and at issue between United States of
America vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, do hereby
certify that in pursuance of the aforesaid stipula-
tion and court order and at the request of Theodore
Tamba, counsel for the defendant Iva Ikuko Toguri
D’Aquino, I examined Nicolaas Schenk, at my
036 Iva [kuko Toguri D’ Aquino
office in Room 335, Mitsui Main Bank Building,
Tokyo, Japan, on the seventh day of May, A.D.
1949, and that the said witness being to me per-
sonally known and known to me to be the same
person named and described in the interrogatories,
being by me first sworn to testify the truth, the
whole truth, and nothing but the truth in answer
to the several interrogatories and cross-interroga-
tories in the cause in which the aforesaid stipula-
tion, court order, and request for deposition issued,
his evidence was taken down and transcribed under
my direction by Mildred Matz, a stenographer, who
was by me first duly sworn truly and impartially to
take down in notes and faithfully transcribe the
testimony of the said witness Nicolaas Schenk, and
after having been read over and corrected by him,
was subscribed by him in my presence; and I |
further certify that I am not counsel or kin to any
of the parties to this cause or in any manner in-
terested in the result thereof.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand
and seal of office at Tokyo, Japan, this 19th day of
May, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the
United States of America.
Service No. 935; Tariff No. 38; No fee prescribed.
[Endorsed]: Filed May 23, 1949.
vs. Umited States of America a7
In the Southern Division of the United States
District Court for the Northern Division of
California
No. 897125
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
VS.
IVA IKUKO TOGURI D’AQUINO,
Defendant.
DEPOSITION OF TAMOTSU MURAYAMA
Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama, taken before
me, Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the
United States of America, in Mitsui Main Bank
Building, Room 335, in Tokyo, Japan, under the
authority of a certain stipulation for taking oral
designations abroad, and upon order of the United
States District Court, made and entered March 22,
1949, in the Matter of the United States of America
vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, pending in the
Southern Division of the United States District
Court, for the Northern District of California, and
at issue between the United States of America vs.
Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino.
The plaintiff, appearing by Frank J. Hennessy,
United States District Attorney; Thomas DeWolfe,
Special Assistant to the Attorney General, and Noel
Story, Special Assistant to the Attorney General,
and the defendant, appearing by Wayne N. Collins
and ‘Theodore T’amba.
038 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
The said interrogations and answers to the witness
thereto were taken stenographically by Muldred
Matz and were then transcribed by her under my
direction, and the said transcription being there-
after read over correctly to the said witness by me
and then signed by said witness in my presence.
It is Stipulated that all objections of each of the
parties hereto, including the objections to the form
of the questions propounded to the witness and to
the relevancy, materiality and competency thereof,
and the defendant’s objections to the use of the
deposition, or any part of the deposition, by plain-
tiff, on the plaintiff’s case in chief, shall be reserved
to the time of trial in this cause.
TAMOTSU MURAYAMA
of Tokyo, Japan, employed by Nippon Times, of
lawful age, being by me duly sworn, deposes and
says:
Direct Examination
By Mr. Tamba:
Q. Mr. Murayama, what is your business or oc-
cupation ?
A. Reporter for the Nippon Times.
@. Where were you born?
A. I was born on December 24, 1905, in Seattle,
Washington.
Q. Have you lived in the United States?
me Yes.
Q. For how long a period of time?
A. About twenty years altogether.
vs. United States of America 539
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Q. Where did you receive your education?
A. Most of it in San Francisco.
Q. What schools?
A. Lowell High School and Golden Gate Col-
lege.
Q. And Golden Gate College is a YMCA night
school in San Francisco? A. That’s right.
Q. For how many years have you been a news-
paper man?
A. About twenty years. This is my twenty-first
year. [2*]
@. Have you been in any foreign countries out-
side of the United States?
A. Yes. All over the world.
Q. Wil you please tell us what countries you
visited.
A. Canada, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Chile, Ar-
gentina, Uruguay, Brazil, Great Britain, that is,
England, Germany, France, Soviet Russia, Italy,
EKeypt, Ceylon, China, Korea, Manchuria, that’s
about all.
Q. That was following your occupation as a
newspaper man ? A. Yes, sir.
You came to Japan, when?
1939 was the last time.
In what capacity, Mr. Murayama?
To take up my work with Tokyo AP office.
You mean Associated Press?
Associated Press, right.
PoOPrOre
*Page numbering appearing at top of page of original
Reporter’s Transcript.
040 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Q. You were caught in Japan during the war, is
that correct ? A. Right.
Q. In the United States, have you had occasion
to interview any people of prominence, in your
capacity as newspaper man? A. Yes.
Q. Who, may I ask?
A. I interviewed Presidents Roosevelt and
Hoover, Vice-President Garner.
Q. Any labor leaders of note?
A. Many, including William Green, John Lewis.
@. Were you ever active in any American politi-
eal campaigns ? A. I was.
Q. In any particular city?
A. In San Francisco.
@. In what capacity?
A. I was one of the eamipeien managers for
Mayor Rossi.
Q. Do you know a man by the name of Major
T'suneishi ?
The Court: I would like to inquire what, if any,
relation any of these questions and answers have
to any issue in this case.
Mr. Collins: I do not know. That is the last of
the questions apparently.
The Court: I hope it is. It has no spite here.
Proceed. ;
Q. Do you know a man by the name of
T’suneishi ? A. Yes.
Q. Do you remember Major Tsuneishi at the
Sanno Hotel in Tokyo? A. Yes.
us. United States of America O41
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
@. What was the occasion ?
A. It was an occasion to get propaganda ma-
terial from American correspondents.
Q. Who was securing this propaganda material ?
A. Major ‘T'suneishi.
Q. What happened at the Sanno Hotel on that
occasion ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to it as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. The American correspondents were put in
separately in each room and they were ordered to
write some manuscript. )
Q. Who issued that order, if you know?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Major T'suneishi.)
Q. Were any Kempei-tai around those rooms, if
you know. If you don’t say so?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to it as immaterial. It
has nothing to do with Radio Tokyo.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I don’t know.)
Q. Did you see Major T'suneishi slap any cor-
respondent? [3]
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial and
incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. He threatened Joe Dynan, now AP corre-
spondent in Paris.)
542 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Q. What did the threat consist of ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. He was told to write an article but he re-
fused so sternly, so T'suneishi slapped him. He
later complained he lost his tooth.)
@. Who, when you say, he lost his tooth?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to it as incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Mr. Dynan.)
Q. Did you see T'suneishi strike Dynan?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. I was standing at the end of the hall and
T saw him.)
Q. Was T'suneishi dressed in uniform on that
occasion ? A. Civilian clothes.
Q. Now, when the war broke out you were work-
ing for the Associated Press office in Tokyo?
A. Yes.
Q. What did you next do in your occupation ?
A. I was arrested for espionage suspect.
. How long were you held at that time?
A. I was released immediately with the condi-
tion that I couldn’t go out of Tokyo without official
permission of Kempei-tai and metropolitan police
force.
Q. What occupation did you follow for your live-
lihood at that time?
A. Mr. Sellmyer of Transocean News Agency,
vs. United States of America 043
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
which was the German news agency, gave me a job.
@. Had the Associated Press office closed?
A. Yes, that is right.
Q. How long did you work for that news agency,
if you remember, approximately ?
A. Until I became sick in 1943, that is, in the
fall of 1943.
Q. Anything unusual happen to you when you
were working at the [4] Transocean agency?
A. There was the Midway fiasco. A Kempei-tai
eaptain invited me for tea, and as I walked out I
was requested to step in a car and then driven down
to Kempei-tai headquarters.
@. What happened at the Kempei-tai headquar-
ters when you got there?
Mr. De Wolfe: Objected to as immaterial and
incompetent. It has nothing to do with the radio
station whatsoever.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. The moment I walked into Otani’s room
he came up: ‘‘You are a spy. All Niseis are spy.
You tip off some naval activities to America.’’ Then
he strike me down there. )
@. How long were you in Otani’s office?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. I’m kept there one whole day. )
Q. Were you officially released by them? By
the Kempei-tai?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
044 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, with condition that I would not say
anything about Midway.)
Q. Now, eventually you became connected with
Camp Bunka? A. Yes.
@. When, approximately ?
A. Probably in December, 1943.
Q. Incidentally, were the Niseis having a hard
time of it to exist in Japan during the war?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to it as incompetent and
immaterial and calling for a conclusion; too gen-
eral.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, six)
Q. Did you assist other Nisei when it came to
living ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to it as immaterial and
incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I helped two Nisei boys and one Nisei
stranded family until I became sick.) |
Q. In what capacity did you report to Camp
Bunka? A. As an interpreter. [5]
Q. Who was in charge of that camp, if you
know?
A. Mr. Fujimura was the civilian figurehead and
Mr. T’suneishi was the executive officer.
Q. But who had the say in what was done?
A. Major Tsuneishi.
vs. United States of America 545
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
@. Incidentally, that was not called Camp Bunka
at the time?
A. It was known as Surugadai Gijitsu Kenk-
yosho. j
Q. What is the American translation of that
word. .
A. Surugadai, technically Institute for Research ;
Kenkyosho means to do some research work.
@. Were there any prisoners of war at that
institute ? A. ‘Twenty-four or five.
Q. What were those prisoners of war doing, if
you know?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as immaterial and
incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. They were brought in to engage in Japanese
army war progaganda. )
Q. Did these prisoners of. war voluntarily do
that work, if you know?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. No.)
@. Why do you say that, Mr. Murayama?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. First they were picked out by the Imperial
Headquarters out of a prisoner of war list and they
were brought in for this particular purpose.)
Q. What did these lists consist of, out of which
prisoners of war were chosen ?
046 Iva I[kuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to it as immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Names, rank, talents, education, family mem-
bers, and POW number. )
Q. Did you make any protest at the camp re-
garding the use of POWs for broadcasting pur-
poses? [6]
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, if the Court
please.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I told Mr. Fujimura, civilian head of the
POW camp J thought that this kind of radio
broadcast by POW is nonsense.)
Q. What, if anything, did Mr. Fujimura do to
stop it?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as irrelevant and in-
competent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. And he agreed with me; then I submitted
a copy of the international law regarding the treat-
ment of POWs }
Q. To whom did you submit that?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, Your Honor.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I submitted it to Mr. Fujimura.)
Q. Was that law ever called to ae or T'suneishi’s
attention, if you know?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to it as —e
The Court: Objection sustained.
us. United States of America 547
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
(A. I think Mr. Fujimura did but Major Tsu-
neishi didn’t pay any attention, I believe.)
Q. Do you remember an occasion on December
10, 1943, when Major Tsuneishi spoke with the
POWs through an interpreter ? A. Yes.
Q. Tell us what was done?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial, having nothing to do with
the issues.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Major Tsuneishi said, in substance, ‘‘You
are ordered to cooperate with the Japanese army
to broadeast. If you fail to cooperate your life is
not guaranteed. )
Q. On that oceasion did he ask any of the POWs
to step forward ?-
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, Your Honor.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. He then said: ‘‘If you refuse to cooperate,
step forward.’’) [7]
@. Did any prisoner of war step forward ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, incompetent and
irrelevant.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. One POW by the name of Williams, British
POW, stepped forward. I thing he stepped two
paces forward.)
Q. You were then in the courtyard when that
happened ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
048 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I was there.)
Q. Who interpreted Mr. Tsuneishi’s speech ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Objection sustained. .
(A. Mr. Uno.)
Q. What happened to Williams?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent
and irrelevant. The same matter has been gone
over before and sustained.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Williams was taken over to the administra-
tion building. Then T’suneishi said: ‘‘He must be
killed’? in the presence of Mr. Fujimura and I,
myself. )
Q. And he was removed from the camp, is that
correct ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. That’s right.)
Q. Were the prisoners of war led to believe that
Williams was executed ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as irrelevant and in-
competent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. When he was removed from the group,
POW group, the boys were trembling with fear.
No one could speak a word. Then they were given
the impression by the time he was removed over to
vs. United States of America 49
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
the administration building—they thought he was
going to be executed.)
Q. Mr. Murayama, do you know an Australian
Major by the name of Charles Cousens?
A. Very well. [8]
@. When did you first see or meet Charles
Cousens regardless of date? I am talking about the
occasion. — A. December, 1943.
Q. Where? At Bunka camp?
A. No, around Radio Tokyo.
@. Under what circumstances did you meet him ?
A. I was at the radio station, Radio Tokyo.
Then I met him in one of the rooms of Radio Tokyo.
We had a meeting. I believe I saw him before that.
I don’t recall the exact date.
Q. What happened in that room, if you know?
A. He was ordered to write some manuscript.
@. Did you hear the order, or did you come in
after the order was given?
A. I came in after the order was given.
Q. Did Major Cousens appear to be frightened,
if you know?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as calling for the
conclusion.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Mr. Collins: This is right within the time he was
on the Zero Hour, if your Honor please.
The Court: It calls for the opinion and conclu-
sion of the witness. Develop the facts.
(A. Very much.)
000 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Q. Describe his appearance.
A. He looked so pale with anger.
Q. Was he trembling, if you recall?
A. That I don’t recall.
Q. Incidentally, another prisoner of war was re-
moved from Camp Bunka some time later?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that, irrelevant, incom-
perent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
Q. And you were not there when he was re-
moved ? [9]
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. No. I was not there.)
@. Did you arrive shortly after his removal?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I went there on the following morning. )
Q. Who gave you the first information -that
Kalbfleisch had been removed from the prisoner of
war camp?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object, incompetent, irrelevant
and immaterial. .
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Several POWs gathered around me with
fearing looks on their faces, speaking in low voices:
“*Kalbfleisch was taken away last night.’’ Wait a
minute, I don’t know, ‘‘last night’’ or ‘‘yesterday.’’
vs. United States of America ool
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
‘‘We are afraid he might be killed. Please try
whatever you can do.’’)
Q. What did you do then?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. I inquired of Uno if he could find out where
Kalbfleisch was taken. Then I learned he was taken
over to Shinagawa POW camp. He is charged with
disobedience, and every POW must be taught some
lesson. He might be executed.)
@. Then what did you do?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. I went to Prince Ri, Korean Prince, a Lieu-
tenant-General, Member of the Military Counsel.
I explained to him what happened so far and I
also explained the international law how POW
should be treated. ‘'hen he promised me he was
going to do whatever he can do.)
Q. Did you discuss with him the subject of com-
pelling prisoners of war to write script and to
broadeast ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant.
The Court: The same objection will have to be
sustained.
(A. I explained to him about the radio propa-
ganda imposed upon [10] POWs. I told him such
kind of writing and radio broadeast is a joke. Then
Dog Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
he said: ‘‘It 1s in the hands of Lt. Gen. Arisue.’’
He said: ‘‘He could interfere.’’)
Q. Was Major Tsuneishi directly ae to
o Arisue ?
r. DeWolfe: Object to that, incompetent, ir-
Seen immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. POW propaganda program was introduced
by Major T’suneishi and General Arisue. )
Q. In other words, Arisue was Tsuneishi’s direct
superior ? |
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. That’s right.)
q. And the prisoners of war thought Kalbfleisch
was executed ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
revelant. :
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. They continually believed Kalbfleisch was
executed. )
Q. Mr. Murayama, I show you a letter dated
August 12, 1947, signed by Edwin Kalbfleisch, Jr.
This is a copy of a letter which you handed to me,
and I ask you where did that copy come from ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant, and immaterial.
Mr. Collins: The materiality will have to appear
from the letter itself, if your Honor please.
The Court: A letter?
vs. United States of America D03
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Mr. Collins: It is a letter, yes, that was to be
identified. It is introduced in evidence subsequently
in the deposition.
The Court: I will allow it; I will give you a
record on it.
Mr. ‘'‘amba: Do you want me to read the answer.
The Court: Read the answer.
(A. This letter came from Captain Edwin Kalb-
fieisch to Prince Ri after he found out he was
rescued without having been court martialed.)
The Court: Justa minute. Let that question and
answer go out, let the jury disregard it for any
purpose in this case. [11]
(. You got that copy from Prince Ri?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
Mr. Tamba: ‘‘I offer this letter in evidence as
defendant’s exhibit ‘1’ in Murayama deposition.”’
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
revelant, immaterial, not the best evidence, Kalb-
fleisch should appear as a witness in connection——
Mr. Collins: May I read something else? Mr.
Storey, who was the attorney for the prosecution,
answered to the offer, ‘‘No objection.’’
The Court: The objection will be sustained. Re-
gardless of what objection was made there or what-
ever may have happened there, the test under the
law is here that the court must rule whether this
O04 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
testimony is admissible to go to the jury, and the
court is not bound by any matter that might have
taken place in relation to this deposition. The real
purpose of it is to present it here to the court, and
the same rule of evidence applies as though they
appeared here in court.
Mr. Collins: I am not quarreling, if your Honor
please, with that.
The Court: I wanted you to know my position,
so that 1t would be clear.
Mr. Collins: Yes. I merely point out that we
are in this situation, that counsel for the prosecu-
tion then present at the taking of the deposition
raised no objection whatsoever and so stated, to the
introduction of that letter into evidence upon the
offer by Mr. Tamba.
The Court: Iam not bound by what the prosecu-
tion may or may not have done at that time and
place. [12]
Mr. Collins: JI understand that, your Honor, but
your Honor is now making a ruling upon a present
objection.
Mr. DeWolfe: J have one statement to make on
that, if your Honor wants to hear me. The record
in this case shows clearly, and the understanding
was unequivocal and clear, entered into in writing
between Mr. Collins, myself and Mr. Hennessey,
that all objections would be reserved to the time of
trial, and it was stated at the outset of each and
vs. Umted States of America 900
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
every one of these depositions. There is no ques-
tion about that, sir.
Mr. Collins: I realize what the stipulation was
and what the Court was entered into. The only ques-
tion that then arises is that here, nevertheless, de-
spite the stipulation, Mr. Storey as counsel for the
prosecution consents to its introduction in evidence.
The Court: Well, the fact that he did, this court
is not bound by that.
Mr. Collins: Well, I am not trying to bind the
eourt by it, | am simply saying that we are caught
in this position.
The Court: I just want to clear it up so if I am
in error you have an opportunity to correct me and
so that you will have a record on it.
Mr. Collins: I would just like the record to show
that, despite the fact Mr. Storey consented to its
introduction in evidence, the prosecution attorneys
now voice an objection to it, and your Honor is
ruling upon that objection.
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
Mr. Collins: And on line 17, is that correct, Mr.
Tamba ?
Mr. Tamba: Yes.
Q. Did you hear repeated threats made to pris-
oners of war at Camp Bunka, that if they failed to
eooperate, their lives would not be guaranteed ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant. |
The Court: Objection sustained.
906 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
(A. Yes.) [13]
@. Who made those threats?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant, immaterial.
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
(A. Major Tsuneishi told prisoners of war in
prisoners of war quarters, through Buddy Uno, as
his interpreter. )
Q. Who was Ikeda? Did a man by the name of
Ikeda work at Camp Bunka?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. Yes.
Q. Did you ever hear him tell the prisoners of
war the same thing ? A. Yes.
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
revelant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Q. Let me ask you, what was the food condition
at Camp Bunka like, Mr. Muriyama?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as not connected with
the issues of the case.
Mr. Collins: That relates directly to the question,
if your Honor please, why the defendant gave food
to the prisoners of war at Bunka.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Food condition was terrible. That is, kao-
liang, that is a Manchurian product, and soya beans
were mixed in the rice and the shortage of salt,
vegetables, and other vital foods was so acute, and
there was continuous sickness such as beri-beri, skin
vs. United States of America D097
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
eruption, falling of hair. Those boys continually
complained to me so I took up the matter with the
eivilian head, Mr. Fujimura, and finally I took it
over to Prince Ri and asked him to improve the
POW camp somehow, otherwise there would be
continuous sickness. )
Q. After your complaint to Prince Ri were con-
ditions improved somehow regarding food?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, your Honor.
The Court: Same ruling. [14]
(A. I brought some food myself; brought in
some medicine and Mr. Fujimura and other civilians
tried to improve as much as we could, nevertheless
there was not much improvement, to my regret. )
@. How about Red Cross packages? Were they
delivered to the prisoners of war?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I believe it was in 1944, early part of 1944,
Henshaw, approached me and explained that there
must be some Red Cross packages for the Allied
prisoners and if there is not they wanted me to make
a contact with the Swiss Diplomatic representative
in Tokyo.)
Q. Did you discuss that matter with Tsuneishi
or anybody?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, if it please the
Court.
The Court: Objection sustained.
508 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
(A. I asked Mr. Fujimura to take up the mat-
ter immediately with Major Tsuneishi. Then some
Red Cross packages came to'Bunka Camp later.)
Q. Who brought them, do you know?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as irrevelant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I think they were brought by Uno and
Ikeda. )
Q. Did you do anything to afford the prison
of war hospital treatment?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Just a moment. In connection with the Red
Cross packages I would lke to explain a little more.
They were brought over to Camp Bunka but they
were kept as a prize for the men accomplishing the
most work, instead of immediate distribution,
whereby I severely protested for this kind of prac-
tice. I said: ‘‘These Red Cross packages belong
to the prisoners of war inasmuch as sent by the
Red Cross, and these packages should be delivered
immediately.’’)
Q. Was Camp Bunka a secret POW camp?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, im-
material. [15]
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. More or less.)
@. Did anyone approach you and ask you to see
the Swiss Consul to see if conditions could be im-
proved ?
vs. United States of America 559
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
revelant, immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, I believe it was Major Cousens men-
tioned about the Swiss Consul.)
Q. Did you see the Swiss Consul ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, if it please the
court.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. I didn’t but I took the matter up with Mr.
Fujimura and I also mentioned it to Prince Ri.)
Q. Did the Swiss Consul ever investigate the
camp ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial, incom-
petent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I believe the Swiss Consul visited the camps
but not Camp Bunka.)
Q. Incidentally, were your activities restricted
during this time?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to, that is not germaine
to the issues, incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I was under constant watch by Kempei-tai
and police. )
@. Were you able to go to see Prince Ri any
time you wished or did you have to sneak out?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
560 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
(A. More or less I have to go there secretly.)
Q. Did any of the prisoners of war protest as
to the type of script they were writing, do you
know ? |
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that-as immaterial, too
general, incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. They continually complained that they did
not want to write any [16] such war progaganda
manuscript as assigned to them by Uno.)
(). Were these protests made in writing to you?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, if it please the
Court.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Yes, there were many, times secretly handed
to me. They were afraid to speak to me directly.)
Q. What did you do with them?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, your Honor.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Some of them I told to Mr. Fujimura and
Mr. Matsui. )
Q. Oh, incidentally, Mr. Murayama, did you ever
see anyone slap Major Cousens?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent, ir-
revelant, and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I did.)
Q. When and where?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent, ir-
relevant.
us. Umted States of America O61
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Mr. Collins: The answer is directed to what oc-
eurred actually at Radio Tokyo, if your Honor
please. |
The Court: With that understanding I will al-
low it. If it doesn’t, I will instruct the jury to dis-
regard it. |
A. I do not recall the exact date, but it was at
Radio Tokyo.
Q. Who slapped him?
A. Mr. Uno was arguing somewhat with Major
Cousens, then Uno slapped him. I left the room im-
mediately, as I was standing way back in the room.
Q. Mr. Muriyama, you were very friendly to the
prisoners of war, is that correct ?
A. I tried to help them as much as I could.
Q. And they took you into their confidence from
time to time, is that not correct.
A. I think they did.
Q. Will you tell us the circumstances under
which you became very friendly with the prisoners
of war? [17]
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant, immaterial .
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. There were many instances. Once Major
Cox was suffering with malaria fever. I took him
to a hospital without official permission as he was
suffering so much. I took other POWs to a hospital
in order to relieve their suffering. )
062 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Q. Were you reprimanded for doing that without
official orders?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
Q. By whom, sir, if you recall?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, if the court
please.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Mr. Uno did not like me. Didn’t want me,
and I finally was ordered not to speak to them with-
out the presence of other Japanese civilian mem-
bers. )
Q. Did you ever talk with either Capt. Ince or
Major Cousens about radio station JOAK ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. Many times.
Q. What were their remarks about radio sta-
tion JOAK?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incompe-
tent, irrelevant, immaterial.
Mr. Collins: This goes directly to the Zero Hour
program, if your Honor please.
The Court: In what manner does it go directly
to 1t?
Mr. Collins: Well, they were on the Zero Hour
program at that time.
The Court: Do those questions and answers
indicate it?
vs. Umted States of America 063
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Mr. DeWolfe: It says ‘‘Radio Tokyo,’’ sir.
Mr. Collins: It says ‘‘Radio Tokyo.”’
The Court: Is the time fixed?
Mr. Collins: It is related to either Captain
Ince—— [18]
The Court: If there is any question about it, I
will allow it.
Mr. DeWolfe: May I point out, it was hearsay;
Captain Ince——
The Court: Read the question again so it will
clear it up.
Mr. Tamba: ‘‘What were the remarks about
radio station JOAK?”’
The Court: Read it counsel, so it will be clear.
Mr. Collins: ‘‘What were their remarks about
radio station JOAK ?”’
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incom-
petent, irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: Assuming that they did make a re-
mark, it 1s hearsay, isn’t it.
Mr. Collins: No, I don’t think it is.
The Court: And self-serving? —
Mr. Collins: No, I don’t think it is self-serving
at all. This is with very particular regard to the
Zero Hour itself.
The Court: Assuming it was, even,
Mr. DeWolfe: Hearsay to us, sir.
The Court: It doesn’t take it out of the hearsay
Tule.
Mr. Collins: It is an expression about the very
064 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
program itself by the persons who were conducting
the program, who were on that program at a time
that the defendant is actually on that program, and
the statement is made to a Japanese who is in
charge, at least had something to do with, two of
the prisoners of war who were on that program,
Muriyama had something to do with it; Muriyama
had something to do with it.
The Court: However, at this time I will allow
him to answer, so we will go along here and dispose
of this matter.
A. They said, ‘‘Radio Tokyo is a scientific toy
for the Japanese, and everything is a joke, and this
program assigned to us is simply the bunk.” [19]
Mr. DeWolfe: Move that that go out. They
should not be allowed under legal rules of evidence
to bolster up their evidence given on the witness
stand by oral statement brought to the attention of
the court and jury by another witness, depriving
the United States of the right of confrontation; and
the statements are made to them by other persons.
The governnment’s position is that it is hearsay and
it should go out.
The Court: Let the answer go out and let the
jury disregard it for any purpose of this case.
Q. In your opinion was it the bunk?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as calling for the
conclusion.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. It was more than a joke.)
vs. Umted States of America 565
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Q. Did you ever hear the prisoners of war broad-
cast weather reports on the radio?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant, immaterial.
Mr. Collins: This is related to what——
The Court: Objection sustained.
Mr. Collins: transpired, apparently, on the
Zero Hour program, with regard to Captain Ince
and Major Cousens.
Mr. DeWolfe: The answers don’t show anything
about the Zero Hour on this deposition. I am fol-
lowing it down the page. If it did relate to the
Zero Hour, I wouldn’t object to it, but there is no
showing it does, sir. There are other prisoner of
war programs.
Mr. Collins: It doesn’t relate to other programs,
it relates to this particular program on which Cap-
tain Ince and Major Cousens were.
The Court: Read it.
Q. Did you ever hear the prisoners of war broad-
cast weather reports on the radio.
The Court: Objection sustained. [20]
(A. Yes.)
Q. In what way did they broadcast weather re-
ports?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: This is the first time weather has
come into these radio broadeasts, is it? Or is it?
Mr. Collins: What is that Your Honor?
066 Iva I[kuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
The Court: Is this the first time weather reports
have come into it?
Mr. DeWolfe: Yes, sir.
Mr. Collins: Well, I can’t say that. There is a
question there. I think it is in the script, as a mat-
ter of fact. It is in there, or there is some testimony
concerning what the prisoners of war were able to
get in the radio script that was broadeast, and the
only form in which they could obtain it. I recall
there is some evidence of that.
The Court: Well, let’s take it a step further.
Regardless of that, what place has it in this record ?
Mr: Collins: It has this much, if your Honor
please, that if they were trying to put out informa-
tion of benefit to the Allies, that is something which
has a direct, material bearing.
The Court: Read the question again.
(). Did you ever hear the prisoners of war
broadcast weather reports on the radio?
The Court: Too general; I will sustain the ob-
jection.
(A. Yes.)
@. In what way did they broadcast weather
reports?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
The Court: I will allow it. Find out what it was.
A. At the beginning of some radio programs the
voice would say, ‘‘Here is another radio program
from Tokyo. It is a beautiful day, it is a fine day,
isn’t 1t?’’ I considered it, myself, a weather broad-
cast.
vs. United States of America 567
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Mr. DeWolfe: Move it go out, your Honor.
The Court: I don’t think it has any place in this
record. However, I will let it stand, if anybody
gets any comfort out of it. [21]
Q. Mr. Murayama, I hand you a document which
bears no date and ask you what this, if you know?
A. This is a letter given to me by the P.O.W.s
when my baby was almost dying.
Q. Is that signed by the prisoners of war in
the camp? A. Yes.
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as immaterial, in-
competent, having no bearing on the issues here.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Q@. How many names on it?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Eighteen names.)
Mr. Collins: ‘‘Mr. Tamba: I offer that as de-
fendant’s exhibit 2 in Murayama deposition.”
May I ask you Mr. Tamba, is that exhibit 2
attached to the deposition ?
Mr. Tamba: Here (indicating).
Mr. DeWolfe: Are you offering it now?
Mr. Collins: Did you see this?
Mr. DeWolfe: No. I object to it—are you
offering it?
Mr. Collins: Yes, we are offering it.
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to it as incompetent, ir-
relevant, immaterial.
The Court: What is it?
068 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Mr. Collins: It is a letter addressed to Mr.
Murayama, ‘‘Dear Mr. Murayama:’’ and it is
signed by some 18 prisoners of war.
Mr. DeWolfe: It is a note of consolation about
the child. It is a letter of consolation about the
sickness of the child.
The Court: Well, that has no place here, I will
sustain the objection to it.
Mr. Collins: Is that letter dated? Will you
see if it bears a date there, Mr. Tamba? [22]
Mr. Tamba: I don’t see any, Mr. Collins.
Mr. Collins: Yes. Do you know the page, Mr.
Tamba? We are on page 14, line 20.
Mr. Tamba: Yes, I have it.
@. Do you know a person by the name of Ken
Oki? A. Yes. |
@. How many years have you known Mr. Oki?
A. Since Sacramento days.
Q. What kind of fellow is he for telling the
truth ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent
and not a proper method of impeachment.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. He is a very flexible man.)
Q. In other words, he will say anything the oc-
casion justified, is that correct?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as being incom-
petent, irrelevant, immaterial, leading, not proper
questioning. ‘
The Court: Objection sustained.
vs. United States of America 569
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama.)
(A. More or less.)
Q. You were accused by the heads of Bunka
Camp of being too friendly with the prisoners of
war?
Mr. DeWolfe: That has no bearing here, noth-
ing germaine, incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I was warned many times that I was too
friendly with these boys so they did not guaran-
tee—— )
@. What did they do about you finally?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I was kicked out.)
Q@. Where did you go from Bunka?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. I went to Radio Tokyo.
Q@. When you were kicked out from Bunka
Camp did you have occasion to see the prisoners
of war again? [23]
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. They wanted me to come down to the broad-
east so I went down there many times.
Q. And, incidentally, you were finally drafted
in the Japanese Army? A. I was.
When was that, Mr. Murayama?
June 23, 1945, I got drafted.
To what work were you assigned ?
Constructing roads.
Where ? A. In Nagano Prefecture.
OFoPre
O70 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Q. And you were in the army for how long?
A. Until the termination of war.
@. Did you volunteer. A. No, I didn’t.
@. Have you ever voted in a Japanese elec-
tion? Am Wedidawot:
Q. Have you ever held a government office in
Japan? A. No.
Q. Mr. Murayama, do you recall a conversation
with Major Cousens in which he indicated he
wished to commit suicide?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant, immaterial, hearsay.
The Court: Sustained.
Mr. Collins: It is preliminary, if your Honor
please.
The Court: The court has ruled; the objection
is sustained.
(A. Yes.)
Q. Tell us the substance of that conversation?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. I took Major Cousens and Capt. Ince home
with me, to my home, and I heard their sufferings
and complaints. Then, later, when I met him at
Radio Tokyo, he said: ‘‘I want to commit suicide.
I cannot stand this kind of humiliation any
longer.’’ He secretly told me, asked me, if I can
obtain a pistol, and I said: ‘‘Absolutely not—I
eannot.’’ [24]
vs. United States of America ay el
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
@. Did he tell you how many bullets he wanted
you to get?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. ‘‘Just one bullet is enough to end my life.”’
I said: ‘‘Keep your chin up. Soon the day may
come, soon.’’)
Q. Incidentally, when you talked with the pris-
oners of war in Radio Tokyo, after your connec-
tion with Bunka Camp had been severed, you con-
tinually told them that the war would soon be over ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as too general,
incompetent, irrelevant, immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I told them latest developments of the war
situation from time to time. I gave them some
short wave news to encourage them to keep up their
vitality. )
Q@. Mr. Murayama, were the prisoners of war
also led to believe that Matsui had also been ex-
ecuted ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as calling for a con-
clusion, incompetent, irrelevant, immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. P.O.W. boys continually asked me why Mr.
Matsui failed to come to see them.)
Q. Were you ever called vile names by Tsuneishi
and Uno and other Japanese civilians in Camp
Bunka ?
O72 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama.)
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as too general,
incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial.
~ The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Names?)
Q. Vile names, did they ever swear at you?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection. -
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. ‘*Hishikari.’’ He didn’t want me to talk
to the P.O.W.s.)
@. What did he call you, bad names?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, if the court
please.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. He said he was going to remove me from
the camp. Rather he was going to ask Tsuneishi ©
to have me removed from the camp.)
Q. Oh, incidentally, referring to this defend-
ant’s exhibit 2 which I offered in evidence, I see
directly to the left of the words ‘‘ Yours very sin-
cerely,’’? two marks in a reddish color. What were
those marks?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to because the letter
didn’t go in.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Mr. Collins: Is that the letter we just looked
at, Mr. T'iamba?
Mr. Tamba: Yes.
(A. They were the Japanese ‘‘han’’ or seal. One
is for Mr. Uno, the other is for Ozeki. These
passed censors, this letter sent to me.)
us. United States of America O73
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Q. Did you ever tell T'suneishi personally that
the prisoners of war complained about conditions
and their work at Camp Bunka, did you?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as immaterial
and incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I told him once or twice.)
@. What did he say to you?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent,
hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I mentioned about the international law
and he commented: ‘‘We ean ignore that.’’)
@. Did you ever know or see a person known
as Iva D’Aquino, also known as Iva Toguri?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know whether that person knows
you?
' I think she just knows me by sight or name.
Where did you see that person?
I saw her at the studio, Radio Tokyo.
Did you ever see her broadcast or hear her?
Yes, introducing their program.
What was she doing? What kind of an in-
troduction was she making? [26]
A. When I saw her she was reading for the
first part of the Zero Hour manuscript for the in-
troduction of musie.
Q. What kind of music was she introducing ?
A. Probably jazz music.
OPorop
O74 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama.)
@. Do you recall? A. Yes.
Q. Did you ever see her in a room with Cou-
sens ? A. No, I didn’t.
@. At the radio station where script was being
prepared ?
A. No, I didn’t see her with Major Cousens
but Major Cousens told me he is working up a
certain program and he gives me some scripts to
read.
Q. Did he say anything about his commentaries
being continuous?
A. He said he is building up commentary one
after another for certain purposes.
@. And what did you say to Cousens?
A. ‘‘Well, since you are imposed to do that
work, do whatever you want.’’
Q. Oh, when Mr. Tsuneishi used to appear at
Camp Bunka was he always wearing a little saber ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Not saber. Japanese sword.)
@. How long is that sword?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, if it please the
court.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. I don’t know the exact measurements, but
three feet or less, something like that.)
@. Was it customary for Japanese officers who
were doing desk work to wear swords?
vs. United States of America O19
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to as too general, incom-
petent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Not at their desks. They are supposed to
remove the sword as soon as they enter the room.)
Q. Did the prisoners of war have swords or
guns so they could protect themselves at Camp
Bunka ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. They were completely helpless, mentally
and physically.)
@. At the beginning of Camp Bunka was the
script prepared by prisoners of war or someone
else, if you know?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as irrelevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. At the early part of the P.O.W. broadcast
manuscripts were prepared by Imperial headquar-
ters. )
@. At the early part of the P.O.W. broadcast
manuscripts were prepared by Imperial
Mr. DeWolfe: ‘That is the answer.
Mr. Collins: I beg your pardon.
Mr. Tamba: Line 18 is the next question, Mr.
Collins.
@. And given to the prisoners of war to broad-
cast ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. That’s right.)
O16 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama.)
Q. Incidentally, was there a Lt. Hamamoto at
Camp Bunka? A. Yes.
Q. Was he also carrying a sword at all times?
A. Always.
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial, move
it go out.
The Court: The objection will be sustained; let
It Fo OUT.
Q. Did Mr. Uno appear in uniform at Cate
Bunka?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Yes.)
Q. Was he likewise carrying a sword?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, your Honor.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.) [28]
Q. At what time did the prisoners of war who
were of the Catholic faith request a priest, do you
know ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant, immaterial, not germain to the issues
here involved, wholly immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Major Cousens approached me one day and
he said: ‘‘There are many Catholic boys. They
are suffering so much. I would lke to help them
somehow. Would you be kind enough to arrange
a holy mass, confession, for these boys.’’ Then I
approached Archbishop Doi and he was so willing
us. United States of America O77
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama.)
and happy to conduct a holy mass at the camp.
Then I was forbidden to make such arrangements
for these boys. It was one of the main reasons
I was kicked out from the camp.)
@. Who forbade you to make these arrange-
ments ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, Judge.
The Court: Same ruling. The objection will
be sustained.
(A. Hishikari and ‘T'’suneishi. So I bought
blessed rosaries for all the. Catholic boys before
I left Camp Bunka. I explained to them that ‘‘I
was very sorry I cannot help conduct holy mass
for you but God bless you.’’)
Q. Mr. Murayama, prisoners of war in Camp
Bunka write you now, do they not?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: Sustained.
(A. Yes, I still receive some letters from Hen-
shaw and Capt. Kalbfleisch.)
Q. And Captain Kalbfleisch sends you gifts at
Christmas, such as clothing?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, he is kind enough to send me all my
needs. )
Q. Where—were there ever any girls who broad-
east at Radio Tokyo, do you know, besides Miss
Toguri ? A. Yes, I know.
Q. Who were they, if you recall? [29]
578 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
A. Ruth Hiakowa, Katherine Muroka, I forgot
the other girls’ first name, Fujiara, and June Su-
yama from British Columbia.
Q. Do you know of a single instance in Camp —
Bunka where any prisoners volunteered to write |
seript or broadcast?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as immaterial,
not germain to the issues here, and———
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
(A. Iam so familiar with the Bunka Camp con-
dition but no one volunteered at any time. Con-
tinuously they complained to me of their physical
and mental sufferings and I tried to prevent such
nonsense; such war effort based upon international
law, but I was helpless. I could not do anything for
them. Some of them tried to please Uno and other
persons at the camp but not from their bottom of
heart. They really despised such broadcasts. )
Q. You had many confidential discussions with
the prisoners of war?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, if the court
please.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, I had, many times.)
Q. And you would be in their rooms discussing
it with them ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, if it please the
court.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. When Uno was not there.)
vs. Umted States of America 579
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Q. When Uno walked in, what happened?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to it as immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Everybody hushed up.)
Mr. Collins: Cross-examination.
Mr. DeWolfe: Waived, not offered.
Mr. Collins: The defendant offers the cross-
examination. This is cross-examination by Mr.
Storey.
(Whereupon the cross-examination was read,
Mr. Collins reading the questions and Mr.
Tamba the answers.) [30]
@. Mr. Murayama, you returned from the
United States to Japan in 1939?
A. The last time.
Q. You retained your American citizenship until
you were drafted into the army?
A. Lbelieve so.
@. What date was that? |
A. I got drafted in the army June 23, 1945.
Q. You considered yourself an American citizen
until that time? A. Yes.
Q@. What were your official duties at Camp
Bunka ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(ae Am interpreter: )
Q. Is that all you did, interpret there?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
080 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
(A. And, and, well, that’s right, interpret.)
@. In other words, you did not have anything
to do unless some official wanted you to interpret?
You didn’t have anything else to do?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. Well, I was given manuscript reading to do.
I took down manuscripts to Radio Tokyo. That’s,
part of my interpreter’s job.
@. Were you censoring these manuscripts ?
A. J did not.
Q. Did you supervise the writing of these manu-
scripts ?
A. Never, I never did. It was not my job at all.
Q. During the time you were at Camp Bunka,
did you have any [31] official capacity with any
other Japanese agency? A. No.
Q. That was the only job you occupied?
A. That’s right.
Q. Did you have any official connection in any
way with the Zero Hour program?
A. Jhad no official capacity with the Zero Hour.
Q. Approximately how many times did you ob-
serve the broadcast of the Zero Hour program?
A. I should say, many times, oh, I should say,
fifteen or twenty times I dropped around the
studio.
Q. That was over a period of how long?
A. It is a long time. I cannot say exactly how
long. I heard the radio program when I was at the
Bunka Camp. I went down there to hear it once
vs. United States of America O81
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
in a while, and even after I went to Radio Tokyo
I heard the program.
Q. You mentioned that there were several other
girls working out at Radio Tokyo, how many of
these girls participated in the Zero Hour program ?
A. I know exactly, Ruth Hayakawa, Cathleen
Muruka, Suyama, wait a minute. Other girls I men-
tioned a while ago were down the studio, but I can-
not exactly say whether they participated or not.
I know these girls read the manuscript.
@. These girls you mentioned did they have
regular parts on the Zero Hour each day it was
broadcast ?
A. I didn’t see every day. I cannot say regular
part each day.
@. While you were observing the Zero Hour
program did you see more than one girl participate
in any Zero Hour program? Be, “Wess
Q. Did you see Miss Toguri and some other girl
participate at the same time and on the same
program ?
A. Maybe June Suyama was there. [32]
Q. Did these other girls have regular parts on
the program or did they substitute for Miss Toguri
from time to time?
A. No, they took parts.
Q. So they were regularly assigned and had
regular parts on the Zero Hour program ?
A. That’s right.
082 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Q. How many girls did the Zero Hour have on
one particular program ?
A. Ihave no exact recollection.
Q. Was Miss Toguri, to your knowledge, forced
to work on this Zero Hour?
A. I don’t know. I cannot say because I never
spoke to her.
Q. Did any Kempei Tai or policeman ever talk
to you concerning Miss Toguri?
A. I don’t know.
Q. You know whether they talked to you, or
not. A. Who?
Q. The Kempei Tai or the police? A. No.
Q. Did Miss Toguri seem to be pleased with her
success as radio announcer ?
A. I don’t know but Major Cousens said: ‘‘I
have a particular aim in this program in building
up this Zero Hour program.’’
Q. That’s your answer? A. Yes.
Q. What did Major Cousens mean by having a
particular purpose in building this program up?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
calling for a conclusion.
The Court: Sustain the objection.
Mr. Collins: Your Honor sustained the objec-
tion ?
The Court: Sustain the objection.
(A. I thought he meant to say a _ counter-
espionage by building up some radio program. [33]
Q. Did you ever hear a Zero Hour program
us. United States of America O83
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
which had a double meaning or which you consid-
ered to be counter-espionage ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as calling for a
conclusion..
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I didn’t pay any attention so I cannot say
anything about it.)
Q. You did hear the Zero Hour program?
= Let Neamd music, just part of it, and L
didn’t pay much attention.
@. What was the purpose of the Zero Hour
program ?
A. It was aimed as Japanese army propaganda
but it was in no way propaganda at all. As Cousens
said, everything was a scientific toy and joke.
Q. The purpose of having the Zero Hour pro-
gram from the Japanese standpoint was to broad-
cast propaganda ?
A. Maybe the Japanese soldiers thought so but
many laughed at the Zero Hour as nonsense.
Q@. Who laughed at the Zero Hour program as
nonsense ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as calling for the
opinion and conclusion, too general.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Many boys and girls working at Radio
Tokyo. Mostly Nisei.)
Q. Was the Zero Hour supposed to amuse and
entertain the American troops ?
#. I don’t know.
084 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Q. Mr. Murayama, start right from the begin-
ning of the Zero Hour programs, as you listened
to it, and tell us everything that you remember
about that particular program. Any program. What
did it consist of ?
A. Jazz, some dramatic part of it. I didn’t pay
much attention. I listened to jazz music, so I can-
not
Q. Then you would leave after you listened to
the jazz? Then you would leave the studio ?
A. That’s right.
Q. That happened on all occasions when you
were at the radio station listening to the Zero Hour ?
A. I listened to some drama part of it but I
have no recollection.
Q. Tell us about part of that drama. What was
it about? :
A. Now, I listened to many radio programs. It
is many years ago and it is very difficult to recollect
the exact type of radio drama. I remember a kind
of lively atmosphere. That’s about all.
Q. Is that all you can tell us about the Zero
Hour? [34]
A. I didn’t pay much attention.
Q. Did you ever see Miss Toguri at Camp
Bunka while you were working there ?
A. Never did. That is, I didn’t stay always
there.
Q. When would you usually see Miss Toguri
around the radio station? What time of day?
vs. United States of America O85
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
A. During evening. I saw her picking up radio
manuscript just before the Zero Hour.
Q@. What were your duties at the radio station?
Why were you there?
A. News translator.
Q. While you were assigned to Camp Bunka
what were you doing at Radio Tokyo?
A. I took down POW or escort boys to the
radio station. -
Q. Who were those boys?
A. (Witness examines defendant’s exhibit ‘‘2”’
in his deposition.) Bucky Henshaw, Light, Newton,
H. Provoo, McNaughton, Wisener, Ince, some
others. It depended——
Q@. What were those people doing at the radio
station ?
A. They broadcast as they were ordered to.
@. What were they broadcasting ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial; it is
not the Zero Hour.
The Court: Unless it is the Zero Hour
Mr. Collins: ‘‘What were these people doing at
the radio station ?—let’s see. No, ‘‘What were they
broadcasting ?’’ This relates to some—I assume it
relates to 17 persons, including Major Cousens and
Captain Ince, that appear on that Exhibit 2.
Mr. Tamba: No, Ince is one of those he escorted.
The Court: The objection will be sustained. [35]
(A. First, manuscripts were prepared by the
Japanese General Headquarters. They were ordered
086 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
to prepare some radio dramas, some commentaries,
and at the very last moment, just before the broad-
cast some parts were cancelled by Buddy Uno.)
Q. What were those scripts and manuscripts
that you mentioned, were they propaganda?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I didn’t think. Some propaganda were pre-
pared by the army, Japanese Imperial Head-
quarters. )
Q. Did these prisoners of war broadcast this
propaganda over the air?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as immaterial, in-
competent, nothing to do with the Zero Hour.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. They were ordered to read it.)
Q. And they did read it over the air?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
The Court: Objection sustained; same ruling.
Mr. Collins: I can’t state definite, if your Honor
please, that that relates to other programs. It well
may include this program. I am not certain of that.
The next sentence will show.
(A. They had to.)
Q. What time did these prisoners of war broad-
east during the day?
A. Between eleven and twelve, or thereabouts.
Q. When they finished broadcasting, did you
take them back to Camp Bunka?
vs. United States of America o8T
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
ae Yes, T dul.
@. Did you have official capacity around Radio
Tokyo later in the day ?
A. Itook manuscripts to Radio Tokyo.
Q. You delivered manuscripts there?
A. Yes, I was ordered to take down the manu-
scripts sometimes.
Q. Whom did you take them to?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial; no reference to the Zero
Hour program whatsoever, question or answer.
The Court: Objection sustained. [36]
(A. Took down to the section that, let’s see.
Had to take it down to the music section to pre-
pare musics, no, wait a minute. I took all manu-
scripts at once and I placed on, who was it, some-
times I left it with Mr. Yamazaki, sometimes with
Mr., I forget, anyway I leave there POW manu-
seripts. )
Q. In other words, you picked up the manu-
scripts prepared by the prisoners of war at Bunka
Camp and delivered them to the radio station, is
that correct?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, if it please the
Court.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Yes, I did.)
Q. Did you have any other official capacity for
these manuscripts other than to take them down to
Radio Tokyo?
088 Iva I[kuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
He Noy I dadngte
Q. Then you would return to Bunka Camp?
A. I was just hanging around Radio Tokyo
rest of the day listening to music or sitting around.
Q. Did you have any regular hours at Bunka?
A. Well, my duty was to take these boys to the
Radio Tokyo, so as soon as my duty is over I went
down to Radio Tokyo, or went home because I was
not feeling well then.
Q. While you were loafing out at the radio
station they had no interpreter at Bunka? [37]
A. Well, Uno was sitting with POWs right in
POW quarters where all POW were assigned to
their duties; blackboard, their names and amount
of work to be done so Uno, and—name by name
were there so I was not needed around the camp
at all, particularly around POW quarters.
@. In other words, they had no need for your
services at all in Bunka? A. No.
Q. Did they keep you out there for how long?
A. Until I was kicked out.
Q. Tell us how long in months from the time
you started working at Bunka until you finished,
you were kicked out?
A. December, 1943, to, it is safe to say, some-
where around January, January or February, 1945.
Q. During this period of time they kept you
out there and your services were not needed what-
ever ?
A. ‘They needed me as an interpreter to escort
us. United States of America 089
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
these boys back and forth to Radio Tokyo and all
that.
Q. Didn’t you testify a minute ago that your
services were not needed at all there?
A. I didn’t say, ‘‘needed at all.’? I said that
after my duty is over I did not go over to the POW
quarters.
@. Were you present when Major Tsuneishi
gave orders to the prisoners of war that they must
cooperate ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
@. And he said that their lives would not be
guaranteed if they did not?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Yes.)
Q. And that one Williams stepped forward and
said he would not cooperate ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial, incom-
petent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
@. Was Willams executed?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(4. No.) fae]
090 Iva Ikuko Togurni D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Q. Did you tell me in the interview here this
morning that Williams was executed, and that you
knew he was executed ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. No, I didn’t say so. I think my wording was
not accurate. )
Q. Didn’t you tell me this morning that Major
Tsuneishi said in the administration office in your
presence, that Williams must be executed ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling; the objection will be
sustained.
(A. Yes he said so, but I said )
Q. And I asked you this morning, was he exe-
cuted, do you recall that?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. No, I didn’t say it.)
@. Do you recall my asking that question?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial, incom-
petent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. You questioned me about Williams, but I
didn’t say he was executed.)
Q. You didn’t tell me that this morning?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
vs. United States of America O91
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
(#&. Io, I didn’tesay so, Mr. Storey. I think it
was your misunderstanding. My inaccuracy in word-
ime, 1 ani sorry.)
Q. Have you talked with anyone during the noon
hour concerning the execution of Williams?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial, incom-
petent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Oh, I said to Mr. Fujimura, that-—)
). Have you talked to anyone during the noon
hour today concerning the execution of Williams?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
Mr. Collins: And then this last question, this is
interposed by Mr. Tamba.
Mr. Tamba: You mean statement.
Mr. Collins: That’s right—statement. He wants
to know did you talk to me about it this noon.
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
CA. Well, Mr Tamba said: “You told Mir.
Storey that Williams was executed’’, so I said: ‘‘No,
I never did and there must be some misunderstand-
ine’’, I sard.)
Mr. Collins: Then the following question by Mr.
Storey, continuing the questions by Mr. Storey.
Q. You have testified that you were present when
Mr. Uno slapped Major Cousens in the radio sta-
tion? de. * Yous
592 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Q. Tell us about that incident?
A. I was back of the room when Uno was argu-
ing something in an [40] angry tone with Major
Cousens. Then I saw Uno slap Cousens, so I left
the room immediately after that.
@. What were they arguing about?
A. I don’t know.
Q. How big was the room where they were argu-
ing ? A. Itisa very big room.
Q. You testified that they were arguing in loud
voices ?
A. Well, I heard angry voices. I could imagine
from the tone of voice
Q. But you cannot remember what they were
arguing about?
A. No, I don’t. I didn’t even inquire, but Major
Cousens was so angry, every time he mentions
Uno’s name he was holding his fists like this (wit-
ness clenches fists).
Q. Did Major Cousens clench his fists after he
was slapped by Uno?
A. I left the room immediately so I don’t know.
Q. How many times did he slap him?
A. Only once as far as I know.
Q. How long were you in the room during this
argument ?
A. Ihave no recollection how long I stayed there
but very short time.
Q. Did you enter the room with Mr. Uno?
A. Yes I followed him, no, wait a minute, when
us. Umted States of America 593
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
I entered there they were arguing. That is the way
I remember it.
Q. Do you recall any portion of the argument?
A. I don’t
Q. And give us, approximately, the dimensions
of the room you were in when this argument was
taking place?
A. That room was, let’s see. It is very difficult
to say. About four times larger than this room (wit-
ness refers to the room in which the deposition is
being taken, which was decided on vyme counsel was
10x20).
Q. Who occupied that office at that time? [41]
A. J think it was the Zero Hour room. I think it
was the Zero Hour room.
Q. Who else was in the room at that time?
A. Three, four boys.
Q. Who were they?
A. I cannot say exactly, Mr. Mitsushio, pardon
me, George Nakamoto was there.
@. Are you sure Mr. Nakamoto was present?
A. I think he was there. I am not sure though.
I recall three or four boys were there.
@. Who else was there?
A. No, I don’t recall, who was there. It was
many years ago and I cannot recall every detail
of every hour I have spent.
Q. Was Mrs. D’Aquino there?
A. No; I don’t think so.
Q. You have given testimony to the effect that
O94 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
you submitted a copy of international law concern-
ing treatment of prisoners of war to the officials
of Camp Bunka?
Mr. De Wolfe: I object to that as being incom-
petent, irrelevant; it went out of the testimony on
direct, of this witness.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
Q. Where did you get that copy?
Mr. De Wolfe: Objected to as immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained. I suggest the
jury take a recess.
(A. Out of my law books.)
(The jury left the jury box and retired for
a recess. The following occurred outside the
presence of the jury.)
The Court: May I inguire, Mr. Collins, how
many depositions there are?
Mr. Collins: Well, I want to read one more
deposition after this, Your Honor, and then I have
some witnesses thereafter.
The Court: You have only one more deposition?
Mr. Collins: Yes, I have a number more, but I
didn’t wish—I wish to read them in a certain order.
The Court: Well, I will address my remarks now
to the number that has not been read in evidence.
Mr. Collins: Oh, I have quite a few, Your
Honor. I have 14 here now.
The Court: J am prepared to take those up in the
absence of the jury and rule on them, so that you
vs. United States of America 095
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama.)
may have a record. We are wasting considerable
time here, and it can not be justified, even under the
law. However, as I have tried to indicate, I have
always been very liberal in giving an opportunity
to make any showing either side desired, that I
thought had any relation to the issues in this case.
But I might suggest that some of these depositions
could be disposed of on motion in their entirety,
with possibly two or three or four or five interrog-
atories.
Mr. Collins: I don’t know.
The Court: I say that now so that you may have
an opportunity to give some thought to the matter,
and I might further say that it might prejudice this
case either on one side or the other, this method of
procedure, if I have any conception of my duty, and
I don’t know what is in the depositions. I don’t
want to prejudice them, but in the light of those
depositions that have already gone in, I am afraid
that we are not only wasting time, but it may preju-
dice your client.
Mr. Collins: Well, that 1s a question. I mean,
if objections are going to be sustained as to certain
lines of questioning, then those are matters that we
could take up with the Court in the absence of the
jury. That is true enough. Then if the Court
sustains objections to, say, given lines,
The Court: You will have a record.
Mr. Collins: We will have a record there. Then
we can still make an offer of proof.
596 Iva I[kuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
The Court: That is all nght. [43]
Mr. Collins: Of course, I think the depositions
then would constitute an offer of proof, by offering
them.
The Court: There is no necessity of going on
with the full question and answer. In doing that,
it would also protect your legal rights.
Mr. Collins: Well, I am sure that two of these—
the balance of this deposition of course, we are
getting close to the end of this deposition.
Mr. De Wolfe: What page?
Mr. Collins: There will be at least one more
deposition.
The Court: You may take it up in the recess;
if there is any way you can meet the situation I
think it would be very well to consider it.
Mr. Collins: I think there is only one more dep-
osition that will be of like character as this one.
There is only one more, I am convinced of that.
The Court: I have one deposition in mind, I
would have no hesitancy on a motion to dispense
with the whole deposition, if I were as familiar with
it as I am now, with the exception of two or three
questions that may now be legally material to the
issues before the Court.
Mr. Collins: Well, then, I would say this then.
What we might do——
The Court: Think about it in any event, and
any plans you can suggest—I had in mind that in
the interests of time also, we might do this, and in
vs. Umted States of America 597
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
the interest of not prejudicing your client one way
or the other.
If I am not hearing this case, I would be hearing
some other case, and it is important.
(Recess.) [44]
Mr. Collins: Page 29, Mr. Tamba, line 23:
Q. Did the prisoners of war at Camp Bunka
know they had rights under international law as
prisoners of war?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial. |
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. They knew that, so Major Cousens and the
boys often requested me to help them according
to the international law.)
@. Did you personally present Major T'suneishi
with a copy of this?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I presented T'suneishi, pardon me, Fuji-
mura, and requested him to explain to Major
Tsuneishi. )
Q. Did Fujimura present this to Major
Tsuneishi ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, your Honor.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. I think he explained to Major Tsuneishi
but Major T’suneishi did not listen, so Mr. Fuji-
mura wanted to resign as eclivilian head of that
camp, and——)
598 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Q. Were you present during the conversation
between Major T’suneishi and Mr. Fujimura?
A. JI was not there.
Q. So all you know about this is what some-
one else told you?
A. Mr. Fujimura told me.
Q. Mr. Murayama, shortly after war was de-
clared, were any foreign nationals interned in
Japan? A. Pardon me?
Q. (Question repeated. ) A. Yes.
Q. Why were they interned ? A. Why?
Q. Yes. A. I don’t know. [45]
Q@. Were they interned because the Japanese
government thought them dangerous in their in-
ternal security, internal security of Japan?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as ealling for
a conclusion.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I didn’t know the policy of the Japanese
Government. )
Q. Were you interned after the outbreak of the
war?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I was not, but I was arrested, and——)
@. How long were you held?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. I was detained for two days and I was
ordered not to go out without official permission.)
us. United States of America 099
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Q. Besides Major Cousens, were you ever pres-
ent when any prisoner of war was slapped?
ue. ~ No:
@. Besides Major Cousens, were you ever pres-
ent when any prisoner of war was beaten in any
way?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. No. Some prisoners complained to me aft-
erwards but I was not present when anyone was
particularly slapped.)
@. Did you ever see Miss Toguri give food to
the prisoners of war? A. I was not present.
@. Were you ever present when Miss Toguri
gave medicine or cigarettes to the prisoners of
war?
A. Some Niseis always secretly handed to them
cigarettes, bread, butter, vitamin pills and other
things, but I was never present when Miss Toguri
brought them things. Most of the times we give
them very secretly.
Mr. DeWolfe: I move that go out, Your Honor.
The Court: Objection sustained. It may go out.
Q. Was Mr. Uno still employed at Camp Bunka
when you left for the army?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I don’t know whether he was there when
I left or he left for Manila after I left there, I
don’t recall.)
600 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama.)
Q. Was Mr. Uno one of your enemies at the
camp ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. I didn’t say enemies, but I was interfer-
ing in many ways.)
Q. Do you hold any bias against Major
Tsuneishi ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent.
The Court: Sustained.
(A. I didn’t, but I wanted to tilda P.O.W.s
as gentlemen, but Major Tsuneishi considered
P.O.W.s more or less criminally so he thought he
can order them anything he wanted to. That
was the difference of the conception of prisoners
of war between me and Major 'T'suneishi.)
@. Are you biased against Major 'T'suneishi?
Mr. DeWolfe: No answer to that.
(Mr. Tamba: He answered that.)
@. Myr. Murayama, have you ever written any
book dealing with propaganda policy for the Japa-
nese government?
A. I never wrote a book.
Q. Did you ever write a long treatise on propa-—
ganda for the Japanese government?
A. During the wartime I was asked to file com-
ments on news and other things but it was not
a publication or edited. Just to submit as part of
my duty to the Imperial Headquarters, just mim2o-
graphed—
vs. United States of America 601
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama.)
Mr. Tamba: If there is a book or a treatise on
which you are questioning the witness I demand
that the witness be [47] shown the document. I
want the witness to see the book or the treatise
then he can answer your questions.
Mr. Storey: I think the government has the
right to ask this man about the treatise——
Mr. Tamba: Show him the treatise and then
you can ask him.
Q. Do you deny writing a book
A. No, not a book.
Q. Did you prepare anything for the Japanese
Government in the nature of propaganda?
A. Well, I was requested to write something on
news so I write this kind of a news, and so on
and so on, and I submit it as I was ordered.
@. When did you submit it?
A. I do not recall the date.
Mr. Tamba: I now make the request again that
the witness be permitted to see this treatise or book
before he is asked any more questions.
Mr. Storey: It is a very simple question, Mr.
Tamba.
Mr. Tamba: I again demand that the book or
treatise be presented to the witness. He has the
right to see any book that he is supposed to have
written, if you are going to ask him any questions
about it.
Mr. Storey: I offer this book in evidence as
government’s Exhibit ‘‘1’’ in Murayama deposition.
602 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
(Book is shown to witness.) [48]
Q. Was it while you were working at Camp
Bunka that you prepared this treatise?
A. J recall that the Niseis was ordered to per-
form some kind of thing. I was ordered to analyze
some news so I said: ‘‘This kind of news is no
good, this kind of news is all right,’’ and I sub-
mitted it to General Headquarters, I think, but
it was not
Q. Was this prepared while you were working
at Camp Bunka?
A. That’s right. I recall that now, yes.
Redirect Examination
By Mr. Tamba:
Q. Is your name [kira Namikawa?
A. My name could be read like that.
Recross-Examination
By Mr. Storey:
Q. Does your name appear on the cover of that
book in Japanese characters, and I am referring
to Government’s Exhibit 1 in the deposition?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: Sustained. |
(A. Yes (indicating Japanese characters on the
eover of the exhibit). When I was arrested and
beaten up Kempei tai ordered me to cooperate
with the war effort, otherwise I would be thrown
us. United States of America 603
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama.)
into prison. If anything happened I could not
support my wife and children so it was part of
my duty assigned to.) [49]
Q. That is your work there in front of you
(indicating Government’s Exhibit ‘*1’’ in this depo-
sition) ?
A. I didn’t say this is most of the work, but
this is some work I was ordered to do.
Q. That is some of the work you were ordered
to do? i, Mes:
Redirect Examination
By Mr. Tamba:
(. Is that book all your work or other people’s
work?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as incompetent
and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Inglish part of the book was Radio Tokyo’s
work, and Japanese part—I was ordered to put
in my own comments and in order to help P.O.W.
and other boys I had to describe some how.)
@. After January, 1945, after you were removed
from Camp Bunka, did you stay around Radio
Tokyo? A. Yes.
Q. Until you were drafted? A, Yes.
Q. Counsel has offered Government’s Exhibit
1, and I am turning from the left of the book
toward the front (indicating Exhibit 1), where
there are a number of Japanese characters. Who
wrote these characters?
604 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
A. I did, and it was mimeographed.
Q. Then the following pages—then I note here
on page 4 there is an English translation. Who
wrote that translation?
A. English was original, so Radio Tokyo broad-
cast.
Q. In other words, you did not translate any
of the English contained in this book, is that cor-
rect?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as immaterial,
improper, incompetent.
The Court: Read that again, please.
(Question reread.)
The Court: I will allow it.
A. I was ordered to criticize radio propaganda
and it was done. [50]
Q. And it was done in Japanese characters by
you?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent and
immaterial.
The Court: Sustained.
(A. Yes, because I was ordered to write it.)
Q. None of these translations were your transla-
tions? 7
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to it as incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. It is not and some of the information came
from army officers, Imperial Headquarters officers
ordered me to write in Japanese so many parts. I
vs. Umted States of America 605
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama.)
wrote according to Japanese army officers’ orders. )
Q. Who is Akira Namikawa?
A. Oh, Akira Namikawa, he is Information
Board official who collaborated with Major Tsunei-
shi for all this war propaganda.
Q. This book which has been referred to as Gov-
ernment’s Exhibit ‘‘1’’ has nothing to do with re-
gard to any testimony you have given with regard
to treatment of prisoners of war in Camp Bunka?
A. It has not. I risk my life to help POWs dur-
ing wartime. [51]
@. Was that written from day to day, or
A. Well, maybe, it is a long time. It covers some
time and Army officers give me Japanese notes,
and say, “‘here, put this in, and put this in, to in-
spire Radio Tokyo boys in connection with your
radio propaganda.’’
. Who were the J apanese army officers, if you
recall ?
A. I don’t reeall their names though, two, three
officers handed me notes and I write in.
@. What rank, if you recall, did these officers
hold? A. Some captains, some majors.
@. Did Tsuneishi ever direct you in a publica-
tion of this kind? |
A. Yes, Major T’suneishi asked me some points
to be emphasized, some civilians brought in some
papers, too. I compiled altogether.
606 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Recross-Examination
By Mr. Storey:
Q. These officers whom you have just mentioned
called on you to advise them in their propaganda
work ?
A. No, they sent papers to the Bunka Camp
and it was on the table—on my table—— .
Q. What were you supposed to do with this
material when itcame? ~ <A. I put together.
Q. Analyze it?
A. I took together and some Japanese parts I
put in where they want.
Q. Did you make any recommendation, or ad-
vise them in any way concerning propaganda?
A. Well, I put in, ‘‘this is all right, or no good.”’
Mr. Collins: Was there an exhibit attached?
Mr. Tamba: There is a book exhibited.
Mr. DeWolfe: J did not understand counsel to
offer this in evidence. I object to it being admitted
in evidence as incompetent, irrelevant and imma-
terial, some book he wrote, and as having nothing
to do with the issues in this ease.
Mr. Collins: I have not read the book, if Your
Honor please. The book seems to be in Japanese
and also in English.
Can you tell me, Mr. Tamba, is there a compete
translation of this Japanese attached.
Mr. Tamba: I would not know. That book was
presented at the deposition by Mr. Storey. He of-
fered it, and that 1s the first time I-had seen it. [53]
us. United States of America 607
(Deposition of Tamotsu Murayama. )
Mr. DeWolfe: If counsel is offering it, we object
to it.
Mr. Collins: It was offered in evidence at the
deposition itself, and if you are raising objection
to it, I suggest you make your objection now.
Mr. DeWolfe: I have already objected.
The Court: The objection will be sustained. Let
it go out and the jury will disregard it for any pur-
pose of this case.
Mr. Collins: I will read the certificate that is
attached to this deposition.
(Certificate read.)
/s/ TAMOTSU MURAYAMA.
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss:
I do solemnly swear that I will truly and im-
partially take down in notes and faithfully tran-
scribe the testimony of Tamotsu Murayama, a wit-
ness now to be examined. So help me God.
/s/ MILDRED MATZ.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 9th day
of May, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the
United States of America.
[American Consular Service Seal.]
Service No. 834a; Tariff No. 38; No fee pre-
seribed.
608 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
DEFENDANT’S EXHIBIT “T’ IN
MURAYAMA DEPOSITION
Capt. Edwin Kalbfleish, Jr.
122 Drake Avenue
Webster Groves 19, Mo.
| August 12, 1947
Dear Prince Ri:
I find this a rather difficult letter to write, Your
Highness. For when one attempts to thank another
for saving his life, it should be done only in person.
Printed words are too impersonal to adequately
convey the feeling which is behind them; only the
spoken word can express the true feeling.
But since many miles separate us, I must use this
method instead of the personal one.
It was only early this year that I learned through
my good friend Tamotsu Murayama, that it was
your intervention which prevented me from facing
a firing squad or a hangman’s noose. When I paced
away my time in solitary confinement at Shinegawa
Camp, I felt that my case was almost hopeless.
However, my trust still rested in the mercy of the
ereat God who would not allow my life to be snuffed
out for having tried to help my fellow prisoners of
war. And when I was marched out of that camp, I
knew that He had intervened to preserve my life.
I did not know how He had done it. But I was
positive that my hfe had been spared because
Murayama-san had been able to put my case before
someone with great authority.
vs. United States of America 609
That someone was you, Your Highness. I can
only say, ‘‘thank you,’’ for I know of no other
words to express more sincerely what I feel. Not
only do I thank you, but also my parents and my
wife thank you. For you made it possible for me to
return to them and to once again enjoy family hap-
piness.
I sincerely hope that some day we may meet, and
I may tell you this in person. I shall always be
deeply grateful for your beneficence.
Sincerely and respectfully,
/s/ EDWIN KALBFLEISH, JR.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
American Vice Consul.
[ American Consular Service Seal. ]
i a
r » Te ish be here et your Baby is 211, and -
or us ney smi dani txe to "help: you in your moment of
U W tl
console yo you to oe there: ‘are
“Tbr
ee. iatigit tae you that. yous he ics A 3000 |
-
: a, HARE Fou have that ynov ledge rh % ea, ‘eas
As we do not forget how good you “Rave been to
my ls
in n the “past, We'want you to know that par thouglits are vith
re i aie t that we = that the iiliess of your
at our concera as {t is your Se 2
. + *aa And we, hope that this’ Little note vill do
" toniattng to ease oat sorrow and make you hope, as we: hope,
“he your troubles will soon roll away and that in a short: ting
by your baby will be back ‘ith ite father again, healthy and-*ell,
* wad just a8 it was before. a Uk Oda. ay
Yours very. sincerely,
vs. United States of America 611
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss:
CERTIFICATE
I, Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the
United States of America in and for Tokyo, Japan,
duly commissioned and qualified, acting under the
authority of a certain stipulation for taking oral
designations abroad, and upon order of the United
States District Court, made and entered March
22, 1949, in the Matter of United States of America,
Plaintiff, vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, Defend-
ant, pending in the Southern Division of the United
States District Court, for the Northern District of
California, and at issue between United States of
America vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, do hereby
certify that in pursuance of the aforesaid stipula-
tion and court order and at the request of Theodore
Tamba, counsel for the defendant Iva Ikuko Toguri
D’Aquino I examined Tamotsu Murayama, at my
office in Room 335, Mitsui Main Bank Building,
Tokyo, Japan, on the ninth day of May, A.D. 1949,
and that the said witness being to me personally
known and known to me to be the same person
named and described in the interrogatories, being
by me first sworn to testify the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth in answer to the
several interrogatories and cross-interrogatories in
the cause in which the aforesaid stipulation, court
order, and request for deposition issued, his evi-
612 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
dence was taken down and transcribed under my
direction by Mildred Matz, a stenographer who was
by me first duly sworn truly and impartially to take
down in notes and faithfully transcribe the testi-
mony of the said witness Tamotsu Murayama, and
after having been read over and corrected by him
was subscribed by him in my presence; and I
further certify that I am not counsel or kin to any
of the parties to this cause or in any manner inter-
ested in the result thereof.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand
and seal of office at Tokyo, Japan, this 19th day of
May, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the
United States of America.
[ American Consular Service Seal]
Service No. 948; Tariff No. 38; No fee pre-
seribed.
[Endorsed]: Filed May 238, 1949.
vs. United States of America 613
In the Southern Division of the United States
District Court for the Northern District of
California
No 31722 BR
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaamiir,
VS.
IVA IKUKO TOGURI D’AQUINO,
Defendant.
DEPOSITION OF SUISEI MATSUI
Deposition of Suisei Matsui, taken before me,
Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the United
States of America, in Mitsui Main Bank Building,
Room 335, in Tokyo, Japan, under the authority
of a certain stipulation for taking oral designations
abroad, and upon order of the United States Dis-
trict Court, made and entered March 22, 1949, in
the Matter of the United States of America vs.
Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, pending in the South-
ern Division of the United States District Court,
for the Northern District of California, and at issue
between the United States of America vs. Iva
Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino.
The plaintiff, appearing by Frank J. Hennessy,
United States District Attorney; Thomas DeWolfe,
Special Assistant to the Attorney General, and Noel
Storey, Special Assistant to the Attorney General,
and the defendant, appearing by Wayne N. Collins
and Theodore T’amba.
The said interrogations and answers to the wit-
614 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
ness thereto were taken stenographically by Mildred
Matz and were then transcribed by her under my
direction, and the said transcription being there-
after read over correctly to the said witness by me
and then signed by said witness in my presence.
It is Stipulated that all objections of each of the
parties hereto, including the objections to the form
of the questions propounded to the witness and to
the relevancy, materiality and competency thereof,
and the defendant’s objections to the use of the
deposition, or any part of the deposition, by plain-
tiff, on the plaintiff’s case in chief, shall be reserved
to the time of trial in this cause.
SUISEI MATSUI ~—
of Kamakura, Honshu, Japan, of lawful age, being
by me duly sworn, deposes and says:
Direct Examination
By Mr. Tamba: |
@. Mr. Matsui, the name Matsui is one which
you adopted for stage purposes? - A. Yes.
@. And you use that name all the time?
A. Yes.
Q. And your real name, the name you were born
under is what?
What school ?
Wasuda University.
A. Joiis family name. Seiei Ioi.
@. And Mr. Matsui, you were born in Japan?
A. Yes.
Q. And received your education in Japan?
A. Yes.
Q.
A.
us. United States of America 615
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
Q. Did you attend any school in the United
States ? A. A few terms in Michigan.
Q. And you have been in the United States?
A. Yes.
Q. When was the first time you came to the
United States? A. That was 1925 sometime.
Q. Did you return to the United States later on?
A. Yes.
@. When, do you recall?
A. I forget—about five or six years later.
Q. At the time of the Olympic games?
A. Yes.
Q. Were you the editor of Newsreel, a Japanese
newspaper ?
A. At the time when the Olympics was on I
edited Asahi newsreels.
@. Then did you return to the United States
again ?
A. Yes, as an actor in Paramount Studio.
Q. And you were back and forth from Japan to
the United States, were you not, at that time?
fm. Yes.
Q. Have you ever been in any pictures in Holly-
wood ? A. Yes.
Q. What pictures?
A. First was ‘‘Hell and High Water.’’ No, first
one was ‘‘Paramount on Parade,’’ and second big
one was “Hell and High Water,’’ and a couple of
other short releases.
Q. What part did you take in ‘‘Paramount on
Parade’’?
616 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
A. Master of ceremonies, and when the Panay
incident took place I went down to Hollywood to
reedit the film to pro-Japanese feelings, and Para- ~
mount called me back to reedit it pro-Japanese way.
The Court: Just a minute. The reporter is hav-
ing some difficulty. Speak up.
Mr. Tamba: I am sorry, Your Honor.
(Previous answer reread by Mr. Tamba. )
Q. Mr. Matsui, did you ever take part in any
radio shows? A. Yes..
Q. Did you ever take part in the Frank Wata-
nabe radio script? A. Yes.
Q. What station?
A. KNX Station—I was the double.
Q. Eddy Holden was Frank Watanabe?
A. Yes. Lam Watanabe. He is too big for Jap-
anese, and I am his double.
@. Now, when war broke out, Mr. Matsui, where
were you?
A. I was sent by the Japanese army to Java.
@. For what purpose?
A. To take care of the broadcasting, maybe
publicity business.
Q. And you were in charge of the station there
for how many years? A. About three years.
Q. Then you were recalled to Japan later on?
A. Yes.
Q. For what purpose?
A. To organize, to supervise radio programs, in-
cluding prisoners program here.
vs. United States of America 617
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
Q. Let me ask you, did you have a prisoner of
_ war program in Batavia? A. Wes:
Q. Will you please tell us what the prisoner of
war program was?
A. By army orders, in my station commentary—
so I must get acquainted with the other stations,
I mean enemy stations, so I started the war prisoner
hour. That is mainly Red Cross purposes. Prison-
ers can use their own communications.
@. In other words, it was used only for the pur-
pose of having the prisoners broadcast messages
home? A. Yes.
@. And also to receive messages from home?
A. Yes, I get answers from prisoners’ homes.
. I show you a document here, containing sev-
eral pages, and ask you what that is?
(Counsel hands paper to witness. )
A. That was the answer, which came from the
outside.
Q. To the prisoners of war there? A. Yes.
Q. And did you deliver it to the prisoners of
war there?
A. Yes. It was delivered by me. My money. I
paid for this copy.
Mr. Tamba:
(I offer this document in evidence as De-
fendant’s Exhibit ‘‘1’’ in Matsui deposition. )
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
ire Court: What is it?
618 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
Mr. Collins: It is a document. I have not seen
it, Your Honor. It is attached only to the original.
Mr. Tamba: It has to do with prisoners of war
messages from the Java station.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Mr. Collins: No objection.
Q. Mr. Matsui, I show you this paper and ask
you what that is?
(Document handed to witness by Mr.
Tamba. )
A. That is Christmas program.
Q. For American prisoners of war?
A. Yes.
Mr. T'amba:
(I offer this document in evidence as De-
fendant’s Exhibit ‘‘2’’ in Matsui deposition.)
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to incompetent, irrele-
vant. It is undoubtedly Java, again.
Mr. Tamba: Yes, that is correct Mr. DeWolfe.
Mr. Collins: What are they, prisoner of war
messages ?
Mr. Tamba: Yes, they are exhanges.
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
(Mr. Storey: No objection.)
Q. I now hand you another document and ask
you if it is the same as Exhibit ‘‘1’’?
(Document handed to witness by Mr.
Tamba. )
A. Yes, broadcast from ‘Australia.
vs. United States of America 619
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
Q. And those are messages to prisoners of war?
A. Yes, at Java camp.
@. And you delivered those messages to the
prisoners of war? A. Yes.
Mr. Tamba:
(I offer this document in evidence as De-
fendant’s Exhibit ‘‘3’’ in Matsui deposition.)
Mr. Storey: No objection.
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-.
relevant. ‘he message is from Australia to prison-
ers in Java.
Mr. Tamba: That is correct, it is still Java.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Q. I show you this document and ask you what
that is?
(Document handed to witness by Mr.
Tamba. )
A. This is the same. I gave the prisoners a
chance to change a little and he write on the bottom.
mr. Pamba:
(I offer this document in evidence as De-
fendant’s Exhibit ‘‘4’’ in Matsui deposition.)
Mr. DeWolfe: Same. objection, same kind of
document.
The Court: Same ruling. The objection will be
sustained.
Mr. Collins: No objection.
Q. I hand you another item and ask you what
that 1s.
620 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
(Counsel hands document to witness.)
A. This is so-called camp newspaper. I received
it on short wave and sent down to the camp and
let them read this one.
Mr. 'Tamba:
(I offer this document in evidence as De-
fendant’s Exhibit ‘‘5’’? in Matsui deposition.)
Mr. Storey: No objection.
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial, a Java
newspaper.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Mr. Collins: Is that what it is?
Mr. Tamba: Yes, this has reference to Java. I
think with the exception—yes.
Q. I hand you a document marked March 7%,
1943, and ask you what that is.
(Counsel hands document to witness.)
A. Americans broadcasting to their country.
Mr. ‘'amba:
(I offer this document headed March 7, 1943,
as Defendant’s Exhibit ‘‘6’’ in Matsui deposi-
tion. )
Mr. Storey: No objection.
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial, Java
broadeasts.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Mr. Collins: Can you tell us just the nature of
that question.
vs. United States of America 621
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
Mr. Tamba: That is in reference to Java. The
next one is Bunka, the next one that follows.
Q@. Myr. Matsui, I hand you document dated
February 27, 1943, and ask you what that is.
(Counsel hands document to witness.)
A. This is a letter that they appreciate my
services for them in the camp.
Mr. Tamba:
(I offer this document in evidence as De-
fendant’s Exhibit *‘7’’, in Matsui deposition. )
Mr. Storey: No objection.
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Mr. Tamba: I will take it back, this is Java too.
*Q@. I hand you another document and ask you
what it is.
(Counsel hands document to witness.)
A. This is a list of war prisoners in Java.
Mr. Tamba:
(I offer this document in evidence as De-
fendant’s Exhibit ‘‘8’’, in Matsui deposition.)
Mr. Storey: No objection.
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial, it is
Java.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Mr. Collins: Did that pertain to Java too, Mr.
Tamba ?
Mr. Tamba: Yes, that is right.
622 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
Q. What became of the rest of your records, Mr.
Matsui?
A. I sent that one to headquarters of Japanese
army but that boat was sunk.
@. Did you have any girls broadcasting at your
station in Java? A. Yes.
Q. And did they broadcast in the English lan-
guage? A. Yes, they did.
@. What was the nationality of these girls who
broadcast there ?
A. Indonesian boys and girls I used. All In-
donesian.
Q. You never compelled any prisoners of war to
broadcast any propaganda ?
A. You mean in Java or Japan?
@. In Java? A. What do you mean?
@. All the prisoners of war broadcast there on
your station were messages to their loved ones at
home ? A. Yes.
Q. And you were familiar with the rules of in-
ternational law for the treatment of prisoners of
war ? A. Yes.
@. And you followed those rules always?
A. Yes——
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes. The first time I even explained what I
meant to all the war prisoners in the camp when
they refused to write letters. Even the chaplain of
the camp refused to write letter to their own coun-
vs. United States of America 623
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
try so I told him to ask permission from the boss
of the camp, and I waited for a few days. Then
they came to me and accepted. They write them-
selves a personal letter.)
«). In other words, all they broadcast were per-
sonal messages to their loved ones? An Ver
@. Your radio station was quite popular, was it
not, Mr. Matsui?
A. I think it was the best one in the whole oc-
cupied Japan. Only one station got the answer
from another station, so when the Japanese general
asked me to come and help the prisoners out over
here——
Q. So you came to Japan, when, to take care of
the Prisoner Hour? A. I forget.
Q. 1943? A. December, 1948.
@. And where did you report for duty ?
A. First time I did to the late General Matsui.
Q. Did you eventually come to Camp Bunka?
A. Yes, as soon as I came back. I met T'suneishi
in headquarters first time.
@. Were you to be the supervisor of Camp
Bunka?
A. Tsuneishi did not tell me that way. I ex-
plained I was the supervisor or something but
T'suneishi did not tell me like that way. I waiting
about one months, one months and a half waiting.
Then Tsuneishi called me and told me: ‘‘You go to
Surugudai, Bunka Camp to help.’’
Q. What was Bunka Camp called?
A. We called it Bunka Camp.
624 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
Q. Did it have any other name, Mr. Matsui?
A. Well,
Q. What does Surugudai mean?
A. Name of the area. That was the secret sta-
tion. Everybody called that station Surugudai
Bunka Kaikan. Bunka camp sometimes it is called
by the officers and soldiers. That was the old Bunka
Gakuin School so the people thought that was in-
stitution or something like that.
@. It was not referred to as a prisoner of war
camp ?
A. Nobody knows that, no. Very few people.
Even officers in the army they do not know.
Q. Did you ‘talk with T'suneishi later about the
prisoner of war program? A. Yes, I did.
Q. What was said on that occasion between you
and him?
A. My information—my opinions was like this.
The program which they had been doing looks like
very funny to me, because they name their pro-
grams as ‘‘Hinomaru Hour,’’ that is Japanese
flag, and ‘“‘Tokyo Rose.’’ So I told Major Tsunei-
shi: ‘‘this is one thing, if you want to let them
listen in better not use such Hinomaru Hour or
Tokyo Rose, such things.
Q. When you talked about Tokyo Rose, you
meant the Zero Hour?
A. Yes, Zero Hour. I first heard the name
‘Tokyo Rose’’ after the war.
Q. What did Tsuneishi say to you?
A. He did not give me answer.
vs. United States of America 625
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
Q. He didn’t agree with you?
A. No, only
@. What did you want the prisoners of war to
broadcast ? A. Is my opinion that
@. The same as in Java?
A. Yes, same as in Java, and tell them truth at
first. My opinion was tell them truths. Always tell
them truths if you want them to listen.
Q. When you talked with Tsuneishi about that,
who was present in the room, do you remember?
A. In headquarters, or Surugudai?
Q. In Surugudai?
A. He had me come to Surugudai. Very often
he called everybody to headquarters in Ichigaya.
Q. When you talked to him about it, did you
discuss it at headquarters ? iN. Woes.
Who was there?
Only Tsuneishi and me.
Do you know a man by the name of Uno?
Yes, I know Buddy.
Where did you meet him?
Buddy Uno, I know him very well first time
I went to Paramount. He came to meet me at the
station.
Q. Then did you see him at Headquarters or
Bunka Camp?
A. Yes, afterwards when I went to Bunka Kai-
kan.
Q. Was he always wearing a uniform? And
earrying a sword? A. Yes.
POPrPO Pe
626 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
Q. Was Tsuneishi always wearing a uniform
and carrying a sword?
A. Yes, but Buddy sometimes changed in civilian
clothes.
Q. When you were in Java did you hear pro-
grams broadcast from Tokyo? A. I think so.
@. How many did you hear?
A. Well, not so often. A couple of times, be-
cause I like to get Japanese commentary because
we were to go with the Japanese headquarters plans
because at that time communication was not so
good by enemy airplanes going over and sometimes
no telegrams and sometimes no letters or orders
from headquarters arrived to Java so I liked to get
Tokyo commentary.
@. Did you hear women broadcasting from
Tokyo at that time?
A. Not so often. A couple of times I think.
(. Did Japan have other stations, besides Ba-
tavia and Tokyo for their broadcasting ?
A. Yes, all parts of occupation area.
Q. Did you know some of the stations?
A. Singapore, Saigon, Java. In Java we have
three.
@. Would Tsuneishi let you change the pro-
gram?
A. No, he did not like to have me over there.
Q. How long were you at Bunka?
A. All through, nearly a year, but actually I
worked about a half year.”
Q. Then what happened ?
vs. United States of America 627
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
A. Well, they sent me to Shanghai.
Q. Was that after you beat up somebody for
stealing from a prisoner of war?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial, in-
competent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
ee. Yes)
Q. Who?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Buddy.)
Q. Why?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as irrelevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I don’t know the first time. I don’t know
what happened, but I see what happened in the
camp, but the rest of the time I see he hit the pris-
oners in the studio, and sometimes Buddy tried to
steal prisoners’ personal belongings so I tell him:
‘“Give it back,’’ and he refused, and he said: ‘‘I
don’t know you,”’ he said that to me, so I tell him:
‘“You said a mouthful,’’ and I throw him down, and
tell him to send the personal belongings back. He
refused. )
@. Where did that encounter with Buddy hap-
pen?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent and
immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I forget the date.)
Q. I mean, where?
628 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that, incompetent, sir.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. In the small monitor room, what you call
monitor room.)
Q. In Radio Tokyo?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: I will allow him to answer.
A. In JOAK, that is broadcasting station in
Tokyo.
Q. After that you were sent to Shanghai?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. After that Tsuneishi and other officers
called me up to headquarters and asked me what
happened. Some of the other officers, they try to
scare me, send me down to the gendarme, and
finish up.)
Q. Did Tsuneishi take part in the direction of a
certain moving picture, ‘‘Shoot That Flag?”’
A. Yes.
@. Whose idea was that?
A. I think it was Tsuneishi’s because he planned
to make the Java prisoners in a picture while I
was not in Java.
Q. Did you have an argument with Tsuneishi
about that picture? A. Yes, I did.
Q. What did you tell him?
A. He did not listen to me.
Q. Did you tell him it was against international
law to use prisoners of war in the film?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
vs. Umted States of America 629
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
irrelevant and immaterial, talking about Java again.
The Court: Yes, objection sustained.
(A. He tried to send that film to Australia by
airplane and tried to throw the film down to some
part of Australia, but I stopped it.
Q. How did you stop it?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that for the same rea-
son, sir.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. I told him to stop it. I don’t know whether
he stopped it, or not, but, anyway, I told him to
stop it.) |
@. Where was that picture made, Mr. Matsui?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection. °
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. It was made in Manila.)
Q. Were prisoners of war used in that picture?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as irrelevant, in-
competent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Many war prisoners, yes.)
Q. You had known Tsuneishi, or met him, be-
fore you came to Japan to take over Bunka Camp?
a, Mo.
Q. You met him?
A. I didn’t know him before.
Q. Did you meet him in Sugamo or Manila?
A. Yes, once I met him in Manila. I knew him.
After I joined the army I know him. Before that I
don’t know him.
Q. When you were in Bunka did the prisoners
630 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
of war ever tell you they did not want to broad-
east? .
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial, nothing to do with the
issue of this case.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Very often. They complained about writing
seript. They told me they did not like to take that
kind of job.)
Q. Did you tell Tsuneishi that? Did you com-
municate that information to T'suneishi, if you re-
member ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, if it please the
Court.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Well, through Mr. Fujimura.)
Q. Do you remember a blackboard at the Bunka
Camp where the work was written down for the
prisoners to do. A, “Wes, lwdo:
Q. Where was that blackboard ?
A. Over this desk, written on
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that, immaterial, in-
competent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Over this desk, written on the blackboard
just like for the grammar school children. ‘‘To-
day you must write this topic,’’ and so and so, and
Buddy sitting in the center of the chair near the
wall, and he examined all scripts which came up
from the prisoners. )
Q. Who started Bunka camp?
vs. United States of America 631
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
A. I don’t know.
Q. But, anyway, it was started by the time you
got there?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial, incom-
petent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, but, anyway, Tsuneishi was boss of
that kind of line of business. We called it, what
you say, ‘‘secret mission of propaganda,’’ or some-
times translated——)
Q. What was the Japanese translation?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as immaterial, in-
competent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Boryaku sen den. Sen den is ‘‘propa-
ganda.’’ Boryaku is ‘‘intriguish.’’
Q. Mr. Matsui, were the prisoners of war well
fed at Camp Bunka?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as not germane to
the issue here, incompetent, irrelevant, immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. No. They all suffer from some kind of ill-
ness. )
Q. Do you remember some of the illnesses suf-
fered by the prisoners of war?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as irrelevant and
incompetent.
The Court: Same ruling, objection sustained.
(A. Some of the prisoners complained about
lessened eyesight, lack of vitamin.)
632 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
@. Did you buy vitamins for them out of your
own pocket?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, im-
material.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, I did, often. Some of the prisoners’
hair came out; some of the prisoners complained
about catching cold, like t.b.)
Q. Did some of them have boils or skin erup-
tions ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Yes.)
@. Were you at Camp Bunka when Tsuneishi —
made a speech, ordering the prisoners of war to
broadeast ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
Q. Who was with Tsuneishi at that time?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Tsuneishi and Buddy, and always Buddy
translated Tsuneishi’s speech.) (page 14, lines 9-
10.)
Q. Was Tsuneishi rattling his sword that day?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object as immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Always he carried his sword.)
Q. Did he shake it?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
vs. United States of America 633
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Holds it on top, something like that. (Wit-
ness holds his hand across his chest, as if holding
something there.) He was very short-tempered,
always moving around.)
Q. Do you remember what that order was like?
What did he say in that order?
Mr. DeWolfe: JI think that is not the best evi-
dence, incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. No, when I was there, I cannot hear what
they say. Anyway, ‘I'suneishi had a speech and
Buddy translated and just a few minutes I was
standing and watching, when I went to the water
closet. ) |
Q. Did you ever tell anybody at the camp that
the prisoners of war were not properly fed?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as hearsay, incom-
petent, irrelevant, immaterial.
The Court: He told someone; objection sus-
tained.
(A. I didn’t ever say.)
Q. Did you ever report to T'suneishi or Uno that
they were not getting enough to eat?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant, immaterial, nothing to do with the issue
in this case.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Well, I didn’t tell them because I thought
there was no use because I buy bread and beans
634 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
and secretly I give them when they come down to
the station. )
Q. Did you know Major Charles Cousens of the
Australian Army? A. Well, I met him.
(). Where did you meet him?
A. Well, I remember in Singapore, or in the
Tokyo station.
Q. Under what circumstances did you meet
Major Cousens in Singapore?
A. I remember by order of the headquarters.
Q. Yes, tell us about it.
A. To find out some fellow who speaks good
English, and who will be reliable to read and write,
and who was maybe, active in newspaper or writ-
ing, or something.
Q. And you interviewed Major Cousens ?
A. Well I saw—before I came back over here
to Japan, I did not know which one was selected,
I was in a couple of offices, I saw them in Singa-
pore
Q. Anyway, you recommended Cousens?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you tell Major Cousens that he was going
to be selected to broadcast? A. No.
Q. And the circumstances under which he ar-
rived in Japan, you did not know? A. No.
Q. Do you know Iva D’Aquino, also known as
Iva Toguri?
A. Well, I did not know which 1s which, but
very often I met the girls who broadcast in the sta-
vs. Umted States of America 635
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
tion when they came out from the broadcasting
room.
@. Did you ever hear the Zero Hour broadeast ?
A. Not in the same room. In the other room.
Q. Did you ever see the Zero Hour broadcast?
A. No, it is quite secret. Was quite secret.
Q. But, anyway, you saw several girls come out
of the room?
A. No, not same time; not same day, so I think
Tokyo Rose was not the one girl.
Q. You thought there were several girls?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
ealling for the conclusion.
The Court: What he thought may go out; the
objection will be sustained.
(A. Several girls took her place.)
Q. Mr. Matsui, did you ever see Buddy Uno in
the broadcasting station ?
A. Very often. Every day.
Q. What was he doing there?
A. Every day he brought the prisoners from
Bunka Camp to the station and watched what they
did. |
Q. Was he standing or sitting near the micro-
phone?
A. Just close to the microphone. He sat and
examined the paper word by word.
Q. Did you tell him he should not do that?
A. I told him once or twice but he did not listen
anymore.
Q. What did he say?
636 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
A. “You are not the authorized person,’’ he
told me. ‘‘ What right you have ?”’
@. Did he tell you who was the authorized per-
son ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, this
is not the Zero Hour program, it is another pro-
gram. That stopped at 12:00 o’clock, according to
the other testimony.
‘Mr. Collins: I don’t know that is
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. ‘‘T was ordered from Tsuneishi’’.)
Q. That is what he said?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to for the same reason.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Yes, ‘‘so I am boss here’’, he told me, so.)
Q. In other words, he told you Tsuneishi told
him to do that?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to for the same reason.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes. Then I told him I was ordered by
higher ranking officer. I told him, but Buddy says
he did not care who they are.)
Q. In other words, Tsuneishi would not let you
take charge of the camp, is that correct ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that, incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Gxy No.)
Q. Did any of the prisoners of war out there
voluntarily broadcast, I refer to Camp Bunka?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as irrelevant, im-
material.
vs. United States of America 637
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
The Court: Objection sustained.
A. Never. Always complained. I think I have
the good proofs, the letters. That shows everybody
asked me to deliver to the General to stop this.
They did not lke to write.)
Q. I have here some notes you gave me and ask
you if that is what you are referring to? (Paper
handed to witness by Mr. Tamba).
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that irrelevant, incom-
petent. It has nothing to do with the Zero’ Hour
program—prisoner of war messages.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, this is the prisoners’ hand-writing.
This is secretly handed over to me from Tamotsu
Murayama. )
Mr. Tamba:
(I offer this paper, containing two messages,
dated 29 February 1944 (on one sheet), signed
‘‘Bucky’’ Henshaw and Edwin Kalbfleish, Jr.,
as defendant’s Exhibit ‘‘9’’ in Matsui deposi-
tion. )
Mr. Storey: No objection.
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant, immaterial, hearsay. Henshaw and Kalb-
fleisch are both here and have been subpoenaed as
witnesses. Not the best evidence.
The Court: Submitted ?
Mr. Collins: Yes, your Honor.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I had many letters but I lost them.)
638 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
Q. You had many letters but you no longer have
them ?
A. Yes, because I was not home for many years
—at home. I was in Shanghai.
Q. Well, Mr. Matsui, Major T'suneishi had con-
siderable power regarding broadcasting of the prop-
aganda, 1s that correct ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial. :
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, only one. He can do anything. What-
ever he want, so far as the publicity is concerned,
including the broadcasting, and publicity, and sign
posters, and motion pictures and books. Everything
what was under his influence.)
Q. Did you ever hear of the broadcast of the
Shinto prayer over the radio?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, that was a very funny one.)
Q. Did you tell them it was very funny?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes. I did not know who made that one,
but I found out when they broadcast, just before
American broadcast start they get out comedians
like me, and Tokogawa Musesawa, and Sojin Kam-
ian and other fellows.)
Q. What did they sound like, these prayers?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
us. United States of America 639
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
The Court: What did they sound ike? What
was that?
Mr. DeWolfe: Shinto prayers.
The Court: Objection sustained. We will now
take an adjournment until 10 o’clock tomorrow.
The jurors may be excused.
(A. Sometime just before the American com-
mentary started they make sound like this (witness
makes wailing sounds). They thought that would
scare the enemy station or let the enemy station
have some interest in the coming program. Very
silly thing, I thought. They found it out, I think.
He said: ‘‘Not silly’’. Maj. Tsuneishi was crazy
T think.)
Q. Mr. Matsui, do you remember when the Swiss
Government asked permission to visit the. prisoner
of war camp ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as immaterial
and incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, I read in the Japanese paper, I re-
member. First time Japanese Government refused
to be investigated at the camp but later on I re-
member I saw the Swiss Consul said everything
okay.)
Q. Did that include Bunka Camp?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Not included.)
Q. Why?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, irrelevant.
640 Iva [kuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. It was a secret place.)
Q. And the Swiss did not know whether it
existed ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. No, even that include the Swiss Consul, so
he say okay, and I think some of the Japanese
superiors asked them to write that to the newspaper
office. They were so powerful, you cannot imagine.
One of the staff officers, when we met in the news-
paper office, he said he did not like to have the
English sign on the glass window, so if the news-
paper office take that sign off—I could let anybody
to break that glass window. I think maybe one
hundred or two hundred yen if I gave a gangster
on the street they come to break that glass easily.
This kind of thing they can easy say in that time.
Everybody went crazy.)
@. Who was Mr. Ikeda?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. The son of a Marquis, or something.
°Q. Was he in Camp Bunka under T'suneishi ?
A. Yes.
@. What did he do?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as immaterial.
The Court: You may indicate for the purpose
of the record the purpose of the testimony.
Mr. Collins: JI think his duties, what his duties
were,
The Court: Objection sustained.
vs. United States of America 641
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
(A. Cooperate with Buddy Uno.)
Q. Incidentally, they did not like you there, the
Japanese ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as immaterial, too
general.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Ikeda and Buddy were so intimate, so
everything happened in the Bunka Camp through
Ikeda reported to Tsuneishi, because Buddy could
not move—always stick to the camp, see.)
@. Did Tsuneishi call you pro-American ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as immaterial,
incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
Q. Tsuneishi was responsible to just one gen-
eral, wasn’t he, Mr. Matsui?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, Judge.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Kind of a line, so he had the superior gen-
eral.)
Q. Who was that general, if you know his name?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I think General Arisuya.)
Q. Tell me this, were the Japanese staff officers
familiar with international law, regarding Japanese
prisoners of war, that is the treatment of American
prisoners of war by the Japanese?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as calling for hear-
say, conclusion, incompetent.
642 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I don’t think they did.)
Q. Did you ever talk with Tsuneishi about inter-
national law and the treatment of prisoners of war?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that, immaterial, incom-
petent, hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Sometimes they told me they can neglect
anything. ‘‘We are fighting so we can neglect any-
thing.’’ They did not hke my international law
business. )
@. I hand you a document and ask you what
that is. (Document handed to witness by Mr.
Tamba. ) ,
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. This is a copy of the treatment of the war
prisoners.
Q. Where did you get that document?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. This one I had made a copy in Java in the
Batavia library.
Q. You brought that to Japan when you came
to take over the supervision of Camp Bunka?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to it as immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I translated this one and sent it to head-
quarters here.)
Q. Headquarters in Japan?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Yes, and other copies of translation I gave
vs. United States of America _ 648
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
to the Java camps. There are many camps in Java.
Very often in the camps they had a big argument.
Every time they ask me to come down to settle. I
took that copy to the Japanese officers. )
Q. So they would know what to do?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(2a: Yes.)
Q. That was for camps besides Batavia?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as calling for hear-
say, incompetent, irrelevant, immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. That was in Java, not here. Here all camps
under Tsuneishi’s influence so I cannot do anything.
Cross-Hxamination
By Mr. Storey:
- Mr. DeWolfe: The cross-examination is not of-
fered by the United States.
Mr. Collins: The defendant will offer the cross-
examination.
(Thereupon the cross-examination of the
above-entitled deposition was read, the ques-
tions being read by Mr. Collins, the answers by
Mr. T’amba.)
Q@. Was the Swiss Government the protecting
power for American interests in Japan during the
war?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to it as immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
644 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
(A. I think so, but I am ssorryeto say ili
frankly, they did not work hard during the war.
Not work so very much. Japanese Army too
strong. )
Q. Did any prisoners of war at Camp Bunka
ever request you to get in touch with their pro-
tecting power for them?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as irrelevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. They are afraid to do so at the beginning.)
Q. Did they ever request you to get in touch
with the Swiss Government ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incom-
petent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. No, they did not tell me. Just I tried to
through Japanese army—let Japanese army do that.
Not yet from the prisoners. War prisoners asked
through me and sometime asked Mr. Maruyama and
told Major Tsuneishi to find out how he ean do with
the Swiss Consulate. )
Q. Did you pass that information on to Tsun-
eishi ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.) |
Q. What did the prisoners ask you to do? What
did they ask you to do?
vs. United States of America 645
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as hearsay, incom-
petent. |
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Send them back to the camps they belonged
before. )
Q. So it had nothing to do with the protecting
power ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. No. They were so scared so they cannot tell;
they cannot write this kind of letter from prisoners
to me was very risky business. (Witness refers to
defendant’s exhibit ‘‘9.’’) They were so scared.
Sometimes one of the prisoners disappeared. Rest
of the prisoners thought he was killed or something
in the camp. Even in the studio Buddy did not like
to talk to the prisoners. Watched them.)
@. Was any propaganda broadcast over your
radio station in Java?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as irrevelant, incom-
petent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Well, all propaganda was ordered from
headquarters, like this way. Order come from the
headquarters. That means T'suneishi. He ordered
all stations—oeccupied stations—this week you to
this, coming week take up the Ghandi case or
Mussolini case. )
Q. So propaganda was broadcast over your sta-
tion in Java?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
646 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. That script came from headquarters. The
rest of the time we rebroadcast news and the per-
sonal letters. )
@. From the Japanese standpoint, what was the
purpose of sending these prisoners’ of war messages
over the air? .
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as calling for a
conclusion, incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. The first time, if 1 wanted to get acquainted
with the enemy station I have to give something.)
Q. In other words these prisoner of war mes-
sages were listener bait so people would listen to
your station?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. I don’t think it was bait, or something, be-
eause I like to do something to the prisoners be-
cause they were so poor. They have no way of com-
munication, so-so, every time I tell war prisoners
they can do anything. If they did not want to use
my station they can )
Q. In other words, this was a kind of a chari-
table practice on the part of the Japanese Govern-
ment ? .
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as irrelevant, 1mma-
terial, incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Not the Japanese Government idea. My own
idea. Not the government. So I was sometimes
us. Umted States of America 647
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
called to headquarters by ‘I'suneishi and other viola-
tions for my station.)
Q@. What did you mean when you said you
wanted other stations to get acquainted with your
station ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. They refused to follow the international law
and so I tried to fight against them, the Japanese
authorities who refused my suggestion so I told
him, ‘‘This is my hour.’’ If they did not like it—
so I explained to the prisoners: ‘‘ You can use an-
swer, but if you write against Japanese or if you
talk against Japanese, maybe this practice will be
stopped and I will be ealled,’’ and then they cannot
use it. ‘‘So, I hope you use your brain and use
whatever you like.’’ So I give that hour to the
prisoners. Every script that came up to me, without
reading, I give them censor’s pass, and headquarters
thought that was bait, something for propaganda,
so-so, so, afterwards, he call me to Tokyo to co-
operate with the headquarters or Radio Tokyo hour
to let the other stations listen in. They wanted to
use my name. I have idea may pass for the hu-
manity sake. Everybody knows that.
When the big trouble took place in Singapore I
went there and all soldiers finished this seript. I
have it. I used to censor the scripts in Java and
give them to the prisoners to take back to their
countries as souvenirs. When I went to Singapore
648 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
from Java, I said: ‘‘This is entirely for Red Cross
purposes.’’ Some of the officers came from Java,
whom I did not remember. He took out the script
which I sent and he told to the other prisoners:
‘‘Mr. Matsui okay, so you can read your letters to
your home.’’)
% * %
Q. Mr. Matsui, you have testified that Major
Tsuneishi carried his sword all the time. Was a
sword part of the usual uniform of a field grade
officer in the Japanese army ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial, incom-
petent, sir.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. It is the usual uniform for the staff officer.
String on shoulder, like this (witness points to right
shoulder), and sword.)
Q. Did you ever see Tsuneishi take his sword
out of the case and threaten anyone with it?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as too general, in-
competent, irrevelant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. No, I did not. In the headquarters?)
Q. No. Remove the sword from the case?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. No, no, no.)
Q. When did you leave the radio station ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. May, 1945.
us. United States of America 649
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
Q. Was Buddy Uno still at the Bunka Camp when
you left?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
Mr. Tamba: I beg your pardon.
Mr. DeWolfe: That is all right.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
@. And he was there all the time you were there?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
Q. How many months before the end of the war
did you leave for Shanghai?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial, sir.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. May the same year.)
Q. How long were you in Shanghai before the
war ended?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Four months. I was in an internment camp
in Shanghai about a year.)
- @. After the war was over?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial.
- The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. After the war. Next year I came back. War
finished. I was in an internees’ camp.)
Q. You worked in Shanghai from May, 1945,
until the war ended?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead, answer it.
A. Four months.
650 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
Q. Mr. Uno was still in Bunka camp when you
left here in May, 1945?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, I saw, I heard.)
Q. Mr. Matsui, when you returned to Tokyo you
were supposed to take over—to take charge of the
prisoner of war program ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
revelant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Here?)
®. Yes.
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that, improper.
The Court: Objection sustained.
“CA, Terhinietso>
Q. Who stopped——
Mr. Collins: Withdraw that.
Q. Who stopped that?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Tsuneishi is the big boss over here.)
Q. So as a result of that you and Major Tsun-
eishi became bitter enemies ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as immaterial, in-
competent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I think so. He never listened to me and in
the beginning I think he refused to take me in the
camp. So it took about two months before he gave |
me the certification paper.)
vs. United States of America 651
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
(Whereupon the redirect examination of the
above indicated deposition was read, Mr. Col-
lins reading the questions and Mr. Tamba the
answers. ) |
Redirect eamination
By Mr. Tamba:
Q. You are not mad at Tsuneishi, are you?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. No. Well, a little bit I am mad.
Q. I refer to defendant’s exhibit ‘*9.’’ I show
you this (defendant’s exhibit ‘‘9’’ is again handed
to witness by counsel) was this written while you
worked at the camp, in 1944?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. I was—I didn’t go to the camp. Murayama
brought it to me.
Q. I show you a letter from Henshaw, stating
‘“copy’’ (paper handed to witness by Mr. T'amba).
You were away from the camp February 29, 1944?
Mr. DeWolfe: Answer it.
A. At the beginning I went to the camp and I
used to meet them in the studio, but Uno did not
like to have me over there.
@. He did not like you at the camp?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as irrevelant, im-
material.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. No.)
Q. After you came back you stayed home for a
while?
652 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Suisei Matsui.)
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. Yes.
Q. How long?
A. About half year. When I came back from
Java I stayed in Japan about a year.
Mr. Collins: Now the document referred to then
in question 17 on page 19 of this deposition was of-
fered in evidence by the defense counsel without
objection on the part of the prosecution, as defend-
ant’s Exhibit 10 in Matsui deposition.
Mr. Tamba: Correct.
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, 17-
revelant, immaterial; something written in Batavia.
The Court: Objection will be sustained.
Mr. Collins: Now, I should like to read the cer-
tificate attached to the deposition of Suisei Matsul,
which has been read into evidence.
(Whereupon certificate attached to above read
deposition was read into the record by Mr.
Collins. )
Mr. Collins: And in addition thereto, each page
of the said deposition is signed at the base thereof
by the deponent, Suisei Matsui.
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss.
I do solemnly swear that I will truly and im-
partially take down in notes and faithfully tran-
vs. United States of America 653
scribe the testimony of Suisei Matsui, a witness now
to be examined. So help me God.
/s/ MILDRED MATZ.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 6th day
of May, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the
United States of America.
[ American Consular Service Seal. |
Service No. 812a; Tariff No. 38; No fee pre-
seribed. .
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss.
CERTIFICATE
I, Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the
United States of America in and for Tokyo, Japan,
duly commissioned and qualified, acting under the
authority of a certain stipulation for taking oral
designation abroad, and upon order of the United
States District Court, made and entered March 22,
1949, in the Matter of United States of America,
Plaintiff, vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, Defend-
ant, pending in the Southern Division of the United
States District Court, for the Northern District of
California, and at issue between United States of
America vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, do hereby
eertify that in pursuance of the aforesaid stipu-
lation and court order and at the request of Theo-
654 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
dore ’'amba, counsel for the defendant Iva Ikuko
Toguri D’Aquino I examined Suisei Matsui, at my
office in Room 335, Mitsui Main Bank Building,
Tokyo, Japan, on the sixth day of May A.D. 1949,
and that the said witness being to me personally
known and known to me to be the same person
named and described in the interrogatories, being
by me first sworn to testify the truth, the whole.
truth, and nothing but the truth in answer to the
several interrogatories and cross-interrogatories in
the cause in which the aforesaid stipulation, court
order, and request for deposition issued, his evidence
was taken down and transcribed under my direction
by Mildred Matz, a stenographer who was by me
first duly sworn truly and impartially to take down
in notes and faithfully transcribe the testimony of
the said witness Suisei Matsui, and after having
been read over and corrected by him, was subseribed
by him in my presence; and I further certify that
I am not counsel or kin to any of the parties to this
cause or in any manner interested in the result
thereof.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand
and seal of office at Tokyo, Japan, this twentieth
day of May, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the
United States of America.
[American Consular Service Seal. ]
Service No. 951; Tariff No. 38; No fee prescribed.
[Endorsed]: Filed May 26, 1949.
|
{
vs. United States of America 655
In the Southern Division of the United States
District Court for the Northern District of
California
Noni? R
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
VS.
IVA IKUKO TOGURI D’AQUINO,
Defendant.
DEPOSITION OF
LESLIE SATORU NAKASHIMA
Deposition of Leslie Satoru Nakashima, taken
before me, Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of
the United States of America, in Mitsui Main Bank
Building, Room 335, in Tokyo, Japan, under the
authority of a certain stipulation for taking oral
designations abroad, and upon order of the United
States District Court, made and entered March 22,
1949, in the Matter of the United States of America
vs. Iva I[kuko Toguri D’Aquino, pending in the
Southern Division of the United States District
Court, for the Northern District of California, and
at issue between the United States of America vs.
Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino.
The plaintiff, appearing by Frank J. Hennessy,
United States District Attorney; Thomas DeWolfe,
Special Assistant to the Attorney General, and Noel
Storey, Special Assistant to the Attorney General,
656 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
and the defendant, appearing by Wayne N. Collins
and ‘I‘heodore ‘Tamba. 3
The said interrogations and answers to the wit-
ness thereto were taken stenographically by Mildred
Matz and were then transcribed by her under my
direction, and the said transcription being there-
after read over correctly to the said witness by me
and then signed by said witness in my presence.
It Is Stipulated that all objections of each of the
parties hereto, including the objections to the form
of the questions propounded to the witness and to
the relevancy, materiality and competency thereof,
and the defendant’s objections to the use of the
deposition, or any part of the deposition, by plain-
tiff, on the plaintiff’s case in chief, shall be re-
served to the time of trial in this cause.
LESLIE SATORU NAKASHIMA
of Tokyo, Japan, employed as United Press cor-
respondent, of lawful age, being by me duly sworn,
deposes and says:
Direct Examination
By Mr. Tamba:
Q. Mr. Nakashima, do you know a man by the
name of Clark Lee? A. Yes.
Q. When and where did you first meet Mr. Lee?
A. Imet Mr. Lee in about 1940.
Q. Do you know a man by the name of Brun-
dage? A. Yes.
Q. When and where did you meet him ?
vs. United States of America 657
(Deposition of Leslie Satoru Nakashima.)
A. Right after the Japanese surrender. When
the first group of correspondents came into Tokyo.
Q. Who introduced you to Mr Brundage?
A. Clark Lee.
Q. Do you know Mr. Brundage’s first name?
A. I don’t remember now what his first name is.
Q. Were Mr. Brundage and Mr. Lee in Japan,
or in Tokyo, prior to the entry of American troops,
if you recall?
A. Well, I don’t remember the two being here
together. Mr. Lee [2*] was here before the war as
an AP correspondent, but I don’t remember Mr.
Brundage.
Q. What was the occasion of your meeting with
these two gentlemen after the surrender ?
A. Why, Lee wanted to get hold of Tokyo Rose.
He said here was a big story and liked me to help
him get it.
@. And you offered to help, to assist them in
getting so-called Tokyo Rose? A. Yes.
Q. What did you then do?
A. So I went over to—I had heard about Tokyo
Rose but I did not know who Tokyo Rose was so
I went over to Radio Tokyo to find out and in the
confusion right after the termination of the war
there were several boys there and Ken Oki was
there, whom I had known.
Q. Did you speak to Ken Oki?
A. Yes, I asked him who Tokyo Rose was.
* Page numbering appearing at bottom of page of original
Reporter’s Transcript.
658 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Leslie Satoru Nakashima. )
Q. What did he tell you?
A. He said as far as they were concerned they
had no Tokyo Rose. They never introduced any
person as Tokyo Rose on their program and by pro-
gram he was referring to what he called the Zero
Hour program and there were five or six other
_ girls on the program.
Q@. Did he give you the name of Mrs. D’Aquino?
A. No. I asked him to get some of the girls and
he gave me the name of Iva Toguri.
Q. What did you next do, Mr. Nakashima?
A. So I told Clark Lee that Radio Tokyo had
told me that there was no single girl by the name
of Tokyo Rose, that there were five or six girls, and
how about it.
@. What did Lee tell you, or Brundage?
A. Well, Lee did not give me any immediate an-
swer. He told me he would think about it and later
on, I don’t know how many [3] hours elapsed,
either he called me or I ealled him back, I don’t
remember, but he told me to go ahead and get Iva
Toguri anyway and to offer her two thousand dol-
lars for an exclusive story. |
Q. Did you meet Iva Toguri after that?
A. No, I didn’t even know where Toguri was
living, Mrs. D’Aquino was living, but I knew her
husband was working for Domei News and I in-
quired at Domei for his address, so I went over
there early the next morning to D’Aquino’s house.
Q. Did you meet Mrs. D’Aquino there ?
vs. Umted States of America 659
(Deposition of Leslie Satoru Nakashima. )
A. Yes, she was home with her husband.
Q. What was said by you and what was said
by her, if anything, at that time?
A. I told her that all the correspondents were
very anxious to get hold of Tokyo Rose; that she
was a big story, and she told me then that she was
not Tokyo Rose; that there were other girls on the
program, and [I remember I told her the corre-
spondents would come after her anyway and that it
would be to her advantage to give the story to Cos-
mopolitan Magazine and make some money, I said,
and I think her husband told her at the time that
it might be a good idea to give an exclusive story
because that would prevent her from being bothered
by the other correspondents. That the other cor-
respondents might not be so interested if she gave
an exclusive story to the Cosmopolitan Magazine.
Q. What did you do then after you talked with
Mrs. D’Aquino ?
A. So I suggested that we all go to the Imperial
Hotel where Clark Lee and Brundage were.
Q. So you went into his room at the Tokyo
Hotel——
A. They invited me to this room on the second
floor of the Imperial.
Q. Do you recall Mrs. D’Aquino telling both
Brundage and Lee that she was not the only girl
on the program?
A. I remember. Right at the outset she said she
was not Tokyo [4] Rose; that there were other girls
660 Iva [kuko Toguri D’ Aquino
_ (Deposition of Leslie Satoru Nakashima.)
on the program, and then a long interview followed.
Q. You did not remain continually in the room?
A. I was there maybe for a half hour.
Q. Then you left? A. Yes.
Q. Incidentally, some contract was prepared up
there in the room? ee Mess
Q. You were a witness to that contract?
A. Yes.
@. You do not recall at this time what was in
that contract, or do you?
A. Well, I don’t remember the full details of
the contract but she might have said that she was
the only Tokyo Rose on the program.
@. In the contract?
A. In the contract she might have. She signed
a contract and the witnesses were her husband and
myself.
Q. Before giving this testimony you talked with
Mr. Noel Storey, did you not? A. Yes.
Q. Did he show you a contract? A. No.
Q. However, you recall that was the first thing
she told Brundage and Clark, that she was not the
only girl
A. Yes, she said right at the outset she was not
the only girl on the program.
Q. Did you have occasion to see Brundage a day
or two following this interview ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that question and the
following answer on the grounds that it is hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
vs. Umted States of America 661
(Deposition of Leslie Satoru Nakashima. )
(A. He told me later that the whole thing was
spoiled because she broke the contract by giving a
mass interview to all the correspondents in Yoko-
hama. )
Q. Mr. Nakashima, you have had oceasion to
interview Mrs. Toguri, [5] or D’Aquino several
times since this date that you have just testified to?
m. Yes.
Q. Under what circumstances, will you tell us?
A. These were occasions when stories appeared
in our cables from the States and we had to get
local reaction from the person herself so I went
Over to interview her on two or three occasions.
T'wo occasions I remember.
Q. What, if anything, in substance, did she tell
you on this occasion—these occasions ?
A. The first time I went there was when a story
came over the wire that the Justice Department in
Washington would take action against her for trea-
son and she told me at that time that she would
welcome a trial any time anywhere because she pe-
heved that she had committed no act of treason
against the United States in that she had not pre-
pared any script, and she said she had been in Su-
gamo Prison for a whole year and the FBI had
ample opportunity to check her, investigate her,
and had released her, and by that action she be-
heved she had been given a clean bill of health.
Q. Did she tell you about anyone coaching her?
A. Yes, she said that—this she said at this inter-
view, with Clark Lee at the hotel, that Major Cou-
662 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Leslie Satoru Nakashima. )
sens had liked her voice and had coached her in
broadeasting.
Q. Did she ever make a statement to you at any
time or any place to the effect that she wanted a
speedy trial before she lost contact with all of her
witnesses, 1f you recall ?
A. She said she wanted a speedy trial, but as
far as about her fear of losing Conia: with wit-
nesses, I don’t remember.
Q. Incidentally, you were in Japan during the
war, were you not, Mr. Nakashima ?
A. Yes. [6]
Q. And you area Nisei? A. Yes.
Q. And you are now a citizen and national of
Japan, is that correct?
A. Yes, technically I am.
Q. Under what circumstances did you change
your citizenship ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant, and immaterial. There is a long answer
about a page long.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Well, when the war broke out I was an
American without dual citizenship. Many Japanese
with dual citizenship are considered Japanese sub-
jects on Japanese soil, as far as the Japanese gov-
ernment is concerned; they did not consider the
American side of it at all, but years before I had—
while I was living in Hawaii I had expatriated
myself from Japanese citizenship; originally I had |
vs. United States of America 663
(Deposition of Leslie Satoru Nakashima. )
dual citizenship but I had expatriated myself from
Japanese citizenship; there was a drive on in Ha-
wail at that time. They wanted all American-
Japanese to be so-called one hundred per cent
American and in the eyes of the Japanese govern-
ment I was an American, and I had to register with
the police for a residential permit over here; when
the war broke out I was thrown in a very em-
barrassing position. Personally, I thought I—that
they would come and intern me, but after searching
my house they decided not to intern me and the
police who had been in my district, making periodic
rounds there before the war, advised me to get out
Japanese citizenship because I might be thrown
into prison and get into difficulties; also my wife
was sick with tuberculosis and was in a sanitarium
and I had a daughter two years old and another one
only ten months old and I was their sole means of
support, and since June, when the Japanese froze
American assets I had not been getting any salary
from New York, and J had a very tough time, and
I could not get to see my bureau chief, the UP
bureau chief, because he was interned and I had
to begin looking for a job and the first thing I did
was try to reduce expenses and I went to the sani-
tarium and transferred my wife from a first class
to a third class [7] room and in December and
January I tried to get jobs but nobody would give
me a job because I was an American and I finally
got a job with Domei News Agency in February,
664 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Leslie Satoru Nakashima. )
after I had made application for so-called restora-
tion of Japanese citizenship. They called it ‘‘family
record.’’ It is not called citizenship or anything like
that. It is called ‘‘family record,’’ and many: Jap-
anese firms require that to give employment. )
Q. Did you Niseis have a pretty hard time dur-
ing the war?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant, and immaterial, too general.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Even after I had taken out Japanese citi-
zenship the gendarme and thought police were after
me all throughout the war. )
Q. You had a pretty difficult time all of you
American-born Japanese, did you not, during the
war?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(I certainly did. I had to go out and plead with
the farmers to sell me food. It would be fantastic
if I had to tell all the things we did.)
| Cross-Examination
By Mr. Storey:
Q. When did you first meet the defendant?
A. That morning.
Q. Give us the date as closely as you can?
A. It must have been early in September of
Q. That was after the war was over ?
vs. United States of America 665
(Deposition of Leslie Satoru Nakashima. )
A. Yes, when the first group of: correspondents
eame in. The first plane came to Atsugi and the
former correspondents who had been in Tokyo just
disregarded orders. They just caught the electric
train from Yokohama and came swarming into
Tokyo, and I renewed my friendship with quite a
few of the correspondents I had known.
Q. You had never heard of Iva Toguri prior to
the time you talked with Lee?
A. J had heard at Domei where I worked that
she was one of the—no, I had heard that she was—
let’s see now. I knew she worked for Domei listen-
ing post. The Domei had listening posts [8] for for-
eign broadcasts and she was one of the employees
listening to the foreign broadcasts and transcribed
them.
Q. Did you or didn’t you know anything about
what she did until after the war was over ?
A. No.
Q. When you talked with Mr. Oki and asked
who was known as Tokyo Rose——
A. 1 didn’t say that. I asked for Tokyo Rose,
simply.
Q. And who did he tell you Tokyo Rose was?
A. Well, he said that on the Zero Hour they
never admitted having a Tokyo Rose and that they
had never introduced any person as Tokyo Rose,
but that they had five or six girls on the program.
Q. Did he give you the names of the other girls?
666 Iva I[kuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Leslie Satoru Nakashima. )
A. No. J asked him for names and he cave | me
Iva Toguri.
@. That is the caer one he gave you?
A. Yes, the only one.
Q. And that is the only checking you did to find
Tokyo Rose?
A. That is all I did. I explained to Lee that
there were five or six girls.
@. Did you contact anyone but Miss Toguri?
A. No,I didn’t. ~
@. Approximately how long did you stay in the
room with Mr. Lee and Mr. Brundage?
A. About one-half hour only.
Q. Was that the only time you were ever present
when Miss Toguri was being interviewed by Lee
and Brundage ? A. Yes.
Q. Did you sign this contract as a witness or did
your name just appear on this paper.
A. I think I signed it.
Q. Don’t you know? Did you or didn’t you sign
it? A. Yes, I signed it. [9]
Redirect Examination
By Mr. Tamba:
Q. While you were present in the Imperial
Hotel was she offered a check by Brundage?
A. Yes, but she refused to take it. She said she
didn’t want it.
/s/ LESLIE NAKASHIMA.
vs. Umted States of America 667
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss.
I do solemnly swear that I will truly and impar-
tially take down in notes and faithfully transcribe
the testimony of Leslie Satoru Nakashima, a wit-
ness now to be examined. So help me, God.
/s/ MILDRED MATZ.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 2nd day
of May, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the United
States of America.
[ American Consular Service Seal. ]
Service No. 732a; Tariff No. 38; No fee pre-
seribed.
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss.
CERTIFICATE
I, Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the
United States of America in and for Tokyo, Japan,
duly commissioned and qualified, acting under the
authority of a certain stipulation for taking oral
designations abroad, and upon order of the United
States District Court, made and entered March 22,
1949, in the Matter of United States of America,
Plaintiff, vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, Defend-
ant, pending in the Southern Division of the United
States District Court, for the Northern District of
California, and at issue between United States of
668 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
America vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, do hereby
certify that in pursuance of the aforesaid stipula-
tion and court order and at the request of Theodore
Tamba, counsel for the defendant Iva Ikuko Toguri
D’Aquino I examined Leslie Satoru Nakashima, at
my office in Room 335, Mitsui Main Bank Building,
Tokyo, Japan, on the second day of May, A.D.
1949, and that the said witness being to me person-
ally known and known to me to be the same person
named and deseribed in the interrogatories, being
by me first sworn to testify the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth in answer to the
several interrogatories and cross-interrogatories in
the cause in which the aforesaid stipulation, court
order, and request for deposition issued, his evi-
dence was taken down and transcribed under my
direction by Mildred Matz, a stenographer who was
by me first duly sworn truly and impartially to
take down in notes and faithfully transcribe the tes-
timony of the said witness Leslie Satoru Naka-
shima; and I further examined the said witness
Leslie Satoru Nakashima at my office in the Mitsui
Main Bank Building, Tokyo, Japan, on the twelfth
day of May, A.D. 1949, at the request of the afore-
said Theodore Tamba, counsel for the defendant,
and upon proper notice given in my presence by
the said Theodore Tamba, counsel for the defend-
ant, to Noel Storey, Special Assistant to the Attor-
ney General, appearing for the plaintiff, on the
second day of May, A.D. 1949; and the said Noel
Storey having due notice that the counsel for the
defendant desired to put to the witness Leslie Sa-
os. United States of America 669
toru Nakashima the question appearing in lines 2
and 3 on page 10 of the attached transcript of the
deposition of Leslie Satoru Nakashima, thereafter
not appearing at the time of the further examina-
tion of the said witness Leslie Satoru Nakashima
on the twelfth day of May, A.D. 1949; and the said
witness, being by me first sworn to testify the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in an-
swer to the further interrogatory of which notice
had been duly given, his evidence was taken down
and transcribed under my direction by Martha
Vaughan Winn, a stenographer, who was by me
first duly sworn truly and impartially to take down
in notes and faithfully transcribe the further testi-
mony of the said witness Leslie Satoru Nakashima ;
and the transcript of the evidence of the said wit-
ness, including the evidence given at the time of
the further examination on the twelfth day of May,
A.D. 1949, having been read over and corrected by
him, was subscribed by him in my presence; and I
further certify that I am not counsel or kin to any
of the parties to this cause or in any manner inter-
ested in the result thereof.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand
and seal of office at Tokyo, Japan, this 16th day of
May, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the United
States of America.
[American Consular Service Seal. ]
Service No. 899; Tariff No. 38; No fee prescribed.
[Endorsed]: Filed May 21, 1949.
670 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
In the Southern Division of the United States
District Court for the Northern Division of
California
No. 31712 R
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
VS.
IVA IKUKO TOGURI D’AQUINO,
Defendant.
DEPOSITION OF TOSHIKATSU KODAIRA
Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira, taken before
me, Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the
United States of America, in Mitsui Main Bank
Building, Room 335, in Tokyo, Japan, under the
authority of a certain stipulation for taking oral
designations abroad, and upon order of the United
States District Court, made and entered March 22,
1949, in the Matter of the United States of America,
vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, pending in the
Southern Division of the United States District
Court, for the Northern District of California, and
at issue between the United States of America vs.
Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino.
. he plaintiff, appearing by Frank J. Hennessy,
United States District Attorney; Thomas DeWolfe,
Special Assistant to the Attorney General, and Noel
Storey, Special Assistant to the Attorney General,
and the defendant, appearing by Wayne N. Collins
and Theodore T’amba.
vs. Umted States of America 671
The said interrogations and answers to the wit-
ness thereto was taken stenographically by Mildred
Matz and were then transcribed by her under my
direction, and the said transcription being there-
after read over correctly to the said witness by me
and then signed by said witness in my presence.
It is Stipulated that all objections of each of the
parties hereto, including the objections to the form
of the questions propounded to the witness and to
the relevancy, materiality and competency thereof,
and the defendant’s objections to the use of the
deposition, or any part of the deposition, by plain-
tiff, on the plaintiff’s case in chief, shall be reserved
to the time of trial in this case.
TOSHIKATSU KODAIRA
of ‘Tokyo, Japan, of lawful age, being by me duly
sworn, deposes and says:
Direct Examination
By Mr. Tamba:
@. Mr. Kodaira, what is your present employ-
ment or occupation ?
A. J am a reporter for the Associated Press
Tokyo branch office.
Q. Where were you born?
A. I was born at 19 Rokken-cho, Wakuyamachi,
Tota-Gun, Miyagi Prefecture, Japan.
Q. And you are a citizen and a national of
Japan, is that correct ? A. Right.
@. Have you ever lived in the United States?
ma Yes.
672 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
Q. Do you know for how many years ?
A. For about ten years.
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
Q. How old were you when you first went to
the United States?
A. Qh, about five years old.
Q. When did you return to Japan?
A. February, 1918.
Q. And have resided in Japan continually since
that date? A. Ever since.
Q. What was your occupation during the war?
A. Iwas an employee of the foreign office.
Q. That is the Japanese Foreign Office?
A. Japanese Foreign Office.
Q@. What were your duties, if any, during that
time ?
A. Monitoring foreign short wave broadcasts.
Q. Do you know a man by the name of H. Yagi?
A. Yes.
@. How long have you known Mr. Yagi?
A. Since 19388.
Q. Do you know a man by the name of Harry
Brundage ? A. Well, I only met him twice.
Q. Will you tell us under what circumstances
you met Harry Brundage. |
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Submitted ?
Mr. Collins: Yes.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Shall I start from the point when Yagi
phoned me up?)
vs. United States of America 673
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
@. Yes.
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to the answer which
contains a lot of hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. One day, I forget the exact date, Mr. H.
Yagi phoned me up at my office. He hollered into
the phone: ‘‘Tosh, don’t you want a trip to the
United States’? Of course, I was so astonished I
could not readily answer. )
@. After that phone call did you meet Mr. Yagi
by some arrangement ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Sustained.
(A. He told me to meet him at the St. Paul’s
Club. )
Q. And did you meet him at the St. Paul’s Club?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to.
The Court: Sustained.
(A. I did.)
Q. Then what was said between you and Mr.
Yagi?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Sustained.
(A. Then he said he knew a fellow named Harry
Brundage. )
Q. Did he tell you how long he had known Mr.
Brundage?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incompe-
tent, irrelevant and immaterial.
674 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. He told me he knew Mr. Brundage before
the war.)
Q. What else did he tell you about Mr.
Brundage ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. He said he was very friendly with the
Brundage family.)
Q. Did he tell you that Mr. Brundage was in
Japan, when you were talking to him?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to—no foundation laid—
hearsay—immaterial and irrelevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
@. Did he tell you where Mr. Brundage was?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Yes.)
Q@. Where did he say Mr. Brundage was?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay and in-
competent, irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: Sustained.
(A. At the Dai Iti Hotel.)
Q. Did he tell you the purpose of Mr. Brun-
dage’s presence in Japan?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay and in-
competent. }
The Court: Sustained.
Gan Sies:)
vs. Umted States of America 6795
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
Q. What was that purpose?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as calling for the con-
clusion of the witness and hearsay.
The Court: Sustained.
(A. He said it was to find witnesses. )
Q. For what case? .
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent and
hearsay.
The Court: Sustained.
(A. Tokyo Rose case.) [2*]
Q. And did you and Yagi thereafter meet
Brundage ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay.
The Court: Indicate for the record the purpose
of this testimony.
Mr. Collins: The purpose of this testimony is to
show that Harry Brundage who had gone to Japan
with his transportation paid by the Attorney Gen-
eral or the Department of Justice for the purpose
of interviewing the defendant.
The Court: Just a minute. Where do you get
that? Where is there anything in the record about
that ?
Mr. Collins: I say that is the purpose.
The Court: How can you make that statement?
Mr. Collins: That is a correct statement, Your
Honor.
The Court: Does the record disclose that?
Mr. Collins: Page 620 of the reporter’s tran-
*Page numbering appearing at top of page of original
Reporter’s Transcript.
676 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.) |
seript of Friday, July 5, 1949, contains a question
addressed to Mr. John B. Hogan, and I will read
from page 619:
‘*Q. When did you arrive in Tokyo?
‘‘A. Iam not certain, but about the 21st or 22nd,
I would say. I think we took about four or five days
to get there.
“*Q. About the 22nd day of March?
‘fA. About the 22nd day of March, 1948.
‘*Q. Now, Mr. Hogan, Mr. Brundidge was quar-
tered with you at the Dai Ichi Hotel, too, was he
not? A. Yes.”’
Mr. Collins: These questions were propounded
by me. |
The Court: What was the purpose, just to estab-
lish that fact? |
Mr. Collins: No, I had to do that to fix the date.
The Court: All right.
Mr. Collins: Of his being sent there.
The Court: All right.
Mr. Collins: ‘*Q. Yes. You were sent there to
investigate the defendant, were you, in Japan?
‘fA. No, not as broadly as that. I went there to
conduct a general investigation. I went out there
for a specific [3] purpose.
“@. And the specific purpose was to interrogate
the defendant.
‘‘A. Not to interrogate the defendant, no, to
merely secure the signature to the already existing
vs. United States of America 677
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
document. I did not interrogate her as to her ac-
tivities.
‘“@. In other words, your instructions from the
Attorney General were to secure the signature of the
defendant to U. S. Exhibit No. 15 which has just
been introduced in evidence, is that correct’’?
Mr. Collins: May I get U. 8. Exhibit No. 15?
I will produce that in just a moment to show Your
Honor what that exhibit is, and then the answer
was:
‘fA. That was one of my instructions.
‘*@. So far as the defendant was concerned, they
were your only instructions, weren’t they ?
‘““A. As far as any contact with the defendant
was concerned yes, sir.’’
Now, let me go on to—and the question, coming
now from page 610, relating to the interview by
Mr. Brundidge and Mr. John b. Hogan of the
defendant on March 26, 1948, reading from page
610 of the reporter’s transcript; this was put on
direct examination by Mr. DeWolfe:
‘@. Did you have a conversation with her at
that time and place? A. Yes, sir.
‘*(. Who were present at the conversation ?
“A. Mrs. Ahn, Mr. Brundidge, the defendant
and myself.’’
Then the transcript shows the conversation.
Now, directing Your Honor’s attention to page
630 of the very same reporter’s transcript, of July
678 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
15, 1949, a question addressed by me to Mr. John
B. Hogan:
‘*Q. Did Mr. Brundidge accompany you to Japan
as an agent for the Attorney General?
‘fA. No, sir. [4]
‘*@. Did the Attorney General bear the expense
of your transportation to Tokyo?
‘‘A. The plane fare was paid for by the a
ment of Justice, yes, sir.
‘“Q. So you went to Tokyo at that time at the
expense of the government?
‘‘A. Only in so far as the plane was concerned,
nothing else.
‘*@. Had you instructed him to accompany you
to Tokyo? A. No, sir.
‘‘Q. Had the Attorney General ?
‘SA. JI think it was the reverse. He offered to go
and the Attorney General accepted his offer.’’
The Court: Read the last question and I will
rule.
The Reporter: The previous question was re-
ported by Mr. Sherry, Your Honor. I do not have it.
Mr. Tamba: I think the last question was: ‘‘ And
did you and Yagi thereafter meet Brundidge’’?
Mr. Collins: Yes.
Q. And did you and Yagi thereafter meet
Brundidge?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir- —
relevant and immaterial, no foundation having been —
laid.
vs. United States of America 679
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
The Court: Objection will be sustained.
(A. Yes, the very next day.)
Q. Where and under what circumstances?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. ‘T'en o’clock the next morning I met Yagi
in front of the Dai Iti Hotel and Yagi called Mr.
Brundage down from his room. He introduced me.
Mr. Brundidge and I shook hands. He was very
polite. He called us up into his room.)
(Whereupon the reading of the deposition
was resumed, the questions being read by Mr.
Collins and the answers by Mr. Tamba.) [5]
Q. Did Mr. Brundidge give either you or Yagi
some whisky while you were in the room?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained. Let it go out
and let the jury disregard it for any purpose in this
ease.
(A. Yes, we took a couple of drinks.)
Q. Then what was said by Brundidge, if any-
thing.
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, imma-
terial, incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Well, he suggested that ‘‘you and Yagi just
saw and heard Tokyo Rose broadcasting.’’)
Q. Did he suggest the time and place and the
680 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
circumstances under which you heard her broadcast ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as hearsay, incom-
petent and irrelevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, a little after the March bombing.)
). Did he suggest to you anything that she might
have broadcast on that occasion ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as immaterial,
hearsay, incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
Q. What was that suggestion ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as irrelevant, in-
competent, hearsay.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. That we heard Tokyo Rose broadcasting:
‘‘Soldiers, your wives are out with the war work-
ers.’’)
Q. What did you say to Brundidge after he sug-
gested that to you?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as hearsay, incom-
petent and irrelevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I told him it was very serious to stand as
a witness so I could [6] not make up my mind im-
mediately. I told him I had to think it over. )
Q. What did Mr. Brundidge say to you then?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
The Court: Same ruling.
Cay At) right.’’)
vs. United States of America 681
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
Q. Did he suggest that you go home and think
it over, if you recall?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. That point I don’t remember. )
Q. Did you make arrangements to meet Brun-
didge thereafter ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent
and hearsay, sir.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
Q. When did you arrange this meeting with
Brundidge ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as immaterial, in-
competent, hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. The next day, about the same time, at the
Dai Iti Hotel.)
Q. During that first conversation who were the
persons present in that hotel room ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as irrelevant, in-
competent, immaterial, sir.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yagi, Mr. Brundidge and me.)
Q. Did you ever meet Mr. Hogan, who is con-
nected with the Department of Justice.
Mr. DeWolfe: Just a moment, no objection.
The Court: You may answer.
A. No.
Q. Did you have reason to believe that Mr.
682 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
Hogan was present in Japan at the time Brundidge
was there? [7]
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as calling for a
conclusion.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Oh, Yagi told me about him.)
Q. But you never met Hogan?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. No.
Q. Did you return the next day, after the first
conversation with Brundidge? Did you return to
his hotel ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant, and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, the next day, around ten.)
Q. Where did you go?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as irrelevant, in-
competent, and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. His room.)
Q. It was the same room.
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, your Honor.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Yes.)
Q. What was said by Brundidge, you, or by
Yagi?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as irrelevant, hear-
say, Incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
vs. United States of America 683
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Iodaira.)
(A. I told him I made up my mind and that I
am not going.)
Q. Did you mention anything to him about who
Tokyo Rose might be?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as hearsay, depriv-
ing the United States of the right of confrontation,
incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, I told him that Tokyo Rose was a group
of girls and Iva was only one of them.)
Q. What did he do then?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained. [8]
(A. Then he took a book from the shelf, it was
a black cloth-covered book, I didn’t see the name
of the book or the author but I thought it was
Clark Lee’s book, and in that book he had a line
underlined with pencil which said, I forgot the
exact words, but it showed how Tokyo Rose came
out and said, ‘‘I am Tokyo Rose.’’)
Q. Incidentally, when you left Brundidge’s
room, after the first meeting, what, if anything, did
he give you? |
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Oh, he gave me a half-finished bottle of
whiskey. When I was going out he gave me a
Suit. )
684 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu IXodaira.)
Q. Suit of clothing, you mean?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as imcompetent,
immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Suit of clothing.)
Q. Did he say, in substance, as follows, as you
left the room, after the first meeting: ‘You two
get together and think it over’’?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incompe-
tent, immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. ‘‘You two get together and think it over.’’)
Q. That is, to you and Yagi?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, and no
proper foundation having been laid, incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. At the first session or during the first ses-
sion ?)
Q. Yes.
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Yes, he told us that.)
Q. And when he said ‘‘You two get together,”’
he meant you and Yagi?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that, no foundation
having been laid, hearsay, incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained. [9]
(A. Yes.)
Q. And when you told him the next aan you
had made up your mind, did you tell him why?
vs. United States of America 685
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incompe-
tent, no proper foundation having been laid.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(a. Yes.)
Q. What did you tell him?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incom-
petent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I told him I was a Christian Pastor’s son
and that it was against my fundamental principles
to tell any lies.)
Q. What did Brundidge do when you said that?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant, immaterial, hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. He just nodded.)
Q. Did he shrug his shoulders, do you recall ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as hearsay, call-
ing for a conclusion, incompetent, irrelevant and
immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Well, that I don’t know.)
@. Did he say: “‘All right, it is up to you?’’
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incom-
petent, irrelevant and immaterial, no foundation
having been laid.
The Court: Keeping in mind the rulings of the
court, it is clearly a case of hearsay testimony here,
counsel.
Mr. Collins: Is your Honor making a ruling?
686 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
The Court: The objection is sustained.
(A. Yes.)
Q. Do you recall him saying that.
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, I do.) [10]
(). Then what did you and Yagi do?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial, no foundation having
been laid.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. We came out of his room, out of the Dai
Iti Hotel, and Yagi and I entered a Japanese tea
parlor, a coffee house, I think you eall it, had a
cup of coffee together. )
@. What was said by you and what was said
by Yagi at that place?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, irrele-
vant, immaterial and incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I told Yagi that ‘‘Damn you. We didn’t
contact each other during the war, and it was al-
most impossible for outsiders to get into the Radio
Tokyo building, much less the studio where the
broadcasting was going on.’’ Then I told him,
Yagi, how serious it was to be a witness especially
in a case like this. Yagi told me, after hearing
what I said and what I explained to him, he said
he decided not to go, too.)
~Q. Did he at that time make a statement, in
vs. United States of America 687
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
substance, to the effect that he got a trip, or words
to that effect?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incom-.
petent, irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: Is there any doubt in your mind,
counsel, that this is not hearsay testimony ?
Mr. Collins: It isn’t that, your Honor; I think
that matter was just argued before your Honor
by Mr. Olshausen, and-.it is my frank opinion
that it is clearly admissible testimony, going
The Court: It is hearsay. Now that you have
a record on it, and it seems to me it is sufficient for
all purposes. I don’t want to deny you any legal
position that you take here in this ease, but it
is obvious to me, and I think should be to you, that
this is clearly hearsay testimony. I say that ad-
visedly to you.
Mr. Collins: Well, I have no alternative, if
your Honor please, save and except to read the
deposition, to have your Honor make what rulings
your Honor sees fit to make. [11]
The Court: Very well, that is a matter entirely
for you. But I have clearly indicated the legal
position of the court. That gives you an opportu-
nity, if I am in error in my ruling, to—it saves
your position in the matter. I can’t do any more
than that.
Mr. Collins: Well, it may be that there are ques-
tions, and I assume there are, that your Honor
would make a favorable ruling to in here.
688 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
The Court: Well, if there are, go through
them.
Mr. Collins: Well, I mean, I can’t very well do
that, because it is a question here of also having
a record.
The Court: All right, proceed.
Q. Did you later learn that Yagi went to the
United States? |
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incompe-
tent and irrelevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
Q. To testify as a witness before grand jury
proceedings ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Yes.)
Q. State under what circumstances you learned
that.
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incom-
petent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. One Sunday, my very good friend Toshio |
Yamanouchi, the foreign editor of the Tokyo Shin- ©
bun, he usually comes to my house for a Sunday
bath, so he must have seen Yagi Saturday night |
at the Japanese Press Club—Yagi told Yama-
nouchi that he was leaving for the United States.) ©
Q. Do you know a man by the name of Jim ©
us. United States of America 689
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
Woods or James Woods connected with the United
States Provost Marshal?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. Yes, I eame to know him before Yagi came
back from the United States.
Q. Under what circumstances did you meet Mr.
James Woods?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant, immaterial. [12]
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I was working in my office when he came
in and introduced himself as being a very good
friend of Yagi’s.)
Q. What was said between you and Mr. Woods,
in substance?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incom-
petent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. In substance, he wanted me to go to the
United States.)
Q. Did he tell you with reference to what?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incompe-
tent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, in the Tokyo Rose ease.)
Q. You tell us, in substance, if you recall, what
was said by Mr. Woods and what was said by you
on that occasion. He mentioned Mr. Yagi’s name
to you?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial, in-
competent, irrelevant, hearsay.
690 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
Q. What did he say about Yagi?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, irrele-
vant and incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. He said he was very fond of Yagi. Very
friendly with him on the way to the United States.)
Q. Did he ask you if you knew Yagi?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incom-
petent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. No, he introduced himself as a very good
friend of Yagi.)
Q. Did Mr. Woods ask you if you knew Yagi?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
Q. Did you answer him yes or no? [13]
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. I sand =Wess)
Q. What did he ask you with reference to Yagi,
with reference to this case, and I am speaking of
the occasion in your office in Radio Tokyo, when
you were talking to Mr. Woods?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent,
hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
vs. United States of America 691
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
(A. He wanted me to say, yes, or no, if I was
going with him to the United States.)
@. Who, Mr. Woods?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Yes.)
@. Did he ask you with reference to what?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, your
Honor.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. On this Tokyo Rose ease.)
Q. What did you say to Mr. Woods at that
time ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Well, I didn’t say, yes, or no, immediately.)
@. What were your reasons for not answering,
yes, or not?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as calling for a con-
elusion, hearsay, incompetent, irrelevant and im-
material.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I thought the reason I should not commit
myself was this. If I said ‘‘Yes,’’ I would be
working against my principles. I would be tell-
ing lies. If I said: ‘‘No,’’ I might hurt Yagi.)
Q. So you didn’t give Mr. Woods an immediate
answer ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
The Court: Same ruling.
692 Iva Ikuko Toguni D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
(A. No.)
Q. Did you seek any independent advice regard-
ing the answer you should give Mr. Woods? [14]
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. Yes. |
Q. From whom did you seek that advice?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, 1r-
relevant, immaterial, hearsay. |
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I sought advice from Mrs. Tom Lambert.)
Q. Who is she? |
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant, hearsay, Immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. She is the wife of Tom Lambert, an Asso-
ciated Press correspondent in Tokyo.)
Q. What did Mrs. Lambert tell you?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same: objection, if the Court
please.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. She told me to tell the truth.)
Q. And after you talked to Mrs. Lambert, what
did you do?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant, and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Jimmie Woods called me in his office and
I gave him the statement.)
Q. What was the substance of the statement
you gave Mr. Woods?
os. Umted States of America 693
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that and not the best
evidence, hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. That it was not with Yagi that I saw this
broadcast. )
q). Later you were confronted with Mr. Yagi?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant, and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
@. And what, if anything, did Yagi do at that
time and place?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, hear-
say.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Woods said: ‘‘Tosh says Yagi was not with
him during the broadeast.’’) [15]
Q. What did Yagi say.
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Then Woods says: ‘‘Yagi says that Tosh
was with him during the broadeast. Which is
right? I told Jim “‘Yagi will answer.’’ Yagi ad-
mitted that he was not with me.)
Q. Going back to the meeting with Brundidge
at the Dai Iti Hotel, did he ask you if you knew
a man by the name of Ken Oki?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Yes, he did.)
694 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, sir.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. JI said I did not know him.)
Q. Mr. Kodaira, you have met Mr. Tilman of
the Federal Bureau of Investigation?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. I have, once.
Q. And you have not told him what you have
told us here this morning?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Correct.)
Q. When you met him, he asked you what you
knew about the Toguri case?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. That’s correct.)
Q. And he told you that he wanted to see you
again about Mr. Yagi at some later date?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Yes.)
Q. Do you know a man by the name of Tomatsu
Murayama?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. Yes, I do.
Q. Do you know what connection, if any, he had
with Camp Bunka? A. I didn’t get that.
us. Uinted States of America 695
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
Q. Do you know what connection, if any, he had
with Camp Bunka?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Oh, Camp Bunka, yes, he was there to
analyze monitor broadcasts and at the same time
eriticize the propaganda line adopted by JOAK.)
Q. Did he ever complain to you about the treat-
ment of prisoners of war at Camp Bunka?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, hearsay, sir.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Oh, he did, many times.)
Q. Do you know a man by the name of Major
Tsuneishi ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
mm Yes.
Q. You met him on April 26 of this year, is
that correct? hm Lortech
Q. Where did you meet him?
A. Oh, he was waiting in front of Radio Tokyo
building and came up to the A.P. office with me.
Q. And he later came to your home on the 27th?
mm that’s right. .
Q. Did you talk to him on the 26th in Radio
Tokyo? A. Not much.
Q. Well, did a man by the name of Ken Ishii
approach Major T'suneishi and you?
A. He approached me, I should say, approached
d'suneishi.
696 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
Q. What did he say to Tsuneishi?
A. ‘Told him that the witnesses should not con-
tact the defense.
Q. Did the name of Major Cousens come up
in the conversation between you and Major
Tsuneishi? [17] A. Yes.
Q. State whether or not Major Tsuneishi at that
time and place, either the 26th or the 27th, said to
you that he actually ordered Major Cousens to
broadcast over the radio?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. He did.)
Q. Did he state to you that he had. made a con-
trary statement on some other occasion?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Yes, he did.)
Q. Did he say why he made that contrary state-
ment ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incom-
petent, irrelevant, immaterial, a long answer in-
volving hearsay, sir.
The Court: Sustained.
(A. Yes, Major Cousens’ name came up dull :
the conversation we had at my home. I told
Tsuneishi that I had great respect for Major
Cousens. Tsuneishi said he regretted he did a very
sorry thing against Major Cousens. He explained |
the reasons that while Major Cousens was on trial
vs. United States of America 697
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
in Australia, an Australian investigator came and
asked Tsuneishi whether or not T'suneishi ordered
Major Cousens to broadcast. ‘T'suneishi said he
denied he had given any orders. He regretted that
very much. He did it because he thought he would
implicate his senior officers.)
Q. Who were his senior officers, if you remem-
ber ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. Colonel Nagai and General Arisue, and then
Field Marshal Gen. Sugiyama.
Q. In other words, the reason why he denied it
at that time, that is giving Cousens orders to broad-
east was that he might implicate his senior officers ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as calling for a
conclusion, incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained. [18]
- (A. That’s right.)
Q. Do you recall a broadcast coming over Radio
Tokyo about the time of the battle of the Leyte
Gulf regarding the loss of ships?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
mm Wes, I do.
Q. Who broadcast that information, if you
know ? A. It was Joe Hirakawa.
@. Was that broadcast somewhat confused ?
A. It was greatly confused.
®. In what respect?
A. Hirakawa sank two more Japanese battle-
Ships than was necessary.
698 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
Q. Did you later hear a shortwave station in
San Francisco on the subject?
A. Yes, then came a hit-back.
@. What did it say?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incom-
petent, irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
(A. Said: ‘‘Radio Tokyo did it again.’’)
Q. Incidentally, was the loss of ships broadcast
as a flash news item, if you know?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. I think it was.
@. Are you willing to come to the United States
and testify as to the facts stated in your deposition
this morning? .
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. On one condition, if the A.P. office permits.
Q. I want to ask you something else, did Brun-
didge suggest to you after you went to his hotel on
the second occasion, that you forget all about this
conversation you had with him?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incom-
petent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I forget the exact words he used at that
time but I received the impression that he wanted
to keep all this confidential. Yes, he told me not —
to write any stories but he broke the story by an |
article in the Nashville, Tennessee, paper, and AP —
carried it from Tennessee.) [19]
vs. United States of America 699
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
Mr. Collins: Cross-examination by Mr. Storey.
Mr. DeWolfe: Cross-examination, under the new
Federal Criminal Rules, is waived, sir.
Mr. Collins: The defendant will offer the cross-
examination by Mr. Storey.
(Whereupon the cross-examination was read,
Mr. Collins reading the question and Mr. Tamba
the answers. )
@. When you first met Mr. Brundidge, did he
tell you what his business in Japan was at that
time? |
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, sir.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Oh, yes, he showed me his passport issued
by the Department of Justice, some sort of cer-
tificate. )
@. Was it something like this (Mr. Storey shows
a passport to the witness) ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. No.)
Q@. Did Mr. Brundidge tell you that he was a
representative of the Department of Justice at the
time he first met you?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay.
Mr. Collins: That goes right to the very issue,
if your Honor please.
The Court: Yes, but it is hearsay; the objec-
tion will be sustained.
700 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
(A. Yes.)
Q. Did Mr. Brundidge tell you that he was also
a newspaper man?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incom-
petent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Not exactly. Yagi said Brundidge was an
associate-editor of a certain Hearst Magazine.)
Q. Did Mr. Brundidge tell you that he was a
representative of the Department of Justice when
he talked to you concerning the Iva Toguri case?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay. [20]
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I don’t remember that point.)
Q. What was the paper that Mr. Brundidge
showed you?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as not the best evi-
dence, incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial.
Also hearsay. |
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I vaguely remember he showed me some
kind of a can you call it a certificate, or, I don’t —
know. )
Q. Did he show you anything like this (Mr. i
Storey shows witness his Department of Justice
identification card) ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, irrele-
vant, and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. No, I don’t remember. He showed me
(
vs. United States of America 701
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
something but I don’t know what it was. He showed
me something but it is so vague now.)
Q. Do you recall seeing on the paper that Mr.
Brundidge showed you anything pertaining to the
Department of Justice?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial, incom-
petent, and irrelevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Anything pertaining to the Department of
Justice—I don’t think I remember.)
Q. Mr. Kodaira, have you ever seen a military
entry permit the civilians have which gives permis-
sion for persons to enter Japan (Mr. Storey shows
witness a military entry permit) ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. No, we are not so familiar with them.
Q. How long were you and Mr. Brundidge in
the room on the first occasion that you met him?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, irrele-
vant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. About an hour. Little over an hour.) [21]
Q. Can you recall what Mr. Brundidge said to
you when you first met him? Did he identify him-
Self as an investigator in this case?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. I don’t recall his exact words.
Q. During the conversation with you did he men-
tion to you that he was a newspaper man?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incom-
petent.
702 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I don’t think he did because Yagi told me
before.)
Q. Told you what?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. -Before we met, Yagi told me that he came
in with the first wave of the Occupation as a cor-
respondent. )
Q. Then at the time you first met and talked
with Mr. Brundidge, you didn’t know whether he
was a newspaperman or representative of the De-
partment of Justice ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as calling for a
conclusion, hearsay, incompetent, irrelevant, imma-
terial.
The Court: Objection sustained. ;
(A. This is it, you see, at the meeting we had,
Yagi and J, at the St. Paul’s Club, Yagi told me
that the Brundidge family was very friendly, and
that Brundidge worked as a newspaper man in
Chicago at the time when Al Capone was indicted,
so he gave me the impression, this is Yagi, that
Brundidge is a very good friend of Mr. Tom Clark.)
Q. Do you recall anything that was said by
Brundidge that would lead you to believe that he’
was a representative of the Department of Justice?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as calling for a’
conclusion, hearsay, not the best evidence.
The Court: Objection sustained. .
vs. United States of America 703
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
(A. I personally thought, from Yagi’s explana-
tion, that Mr. Brundidge was acting in behalf of
the Department of Justice, because Yagi told me
that M1. Hogan was the formal representative of
the Department of Justice.) [22]
Q. Did you see or talk to Mr. Hogan at all
during the time he was here?
Mr. DeWolfe: Pardon me just a moment. No
objection.
A. Not at all, not at all.
Q. During your conversation with Mr. Brun-
didge, did he mention to you a trip to the United
States ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incompe-
tent, irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. He more or less suggested that.)
Q. Did he—but he didn’t definitely ask you or
promise you a trip to the States, that you can
recall ? .
Mr. DeWolfe: Objection to as hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. No.)
@. During your conversation with Brundidge
did you tell him that you had witnessed a Zero
Hour broadcast?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incom-
petent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
704 Iva Ikuko Togurn D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
(A. You mean if I saw the Zero Hour broad-
east, yes.)
Q. Did Mr. Brundidge ask you at that time what
Miss Toguri had to say on this program?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial, hear-
say, incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I told him I saw the broadeast. But at
the time of the broadcast, Iva was in the room but
was not broadcasting. The time was shortly before
or after the battle of the Philippine sea.)
Q. Mr. Kodaira, you have testified that Tokyo
Rose was a group of girls?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. Yes.
Q. How do you know this information?
Mr. DeWolfe: Just a moment Mr. Tamba. Ob-
ject to that as hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained. [23]
(A. Because I saw other girls besides Toguri.)
@. How many times did you see the Zero Hour
broadeast ? |
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. Once.
Q. Were there other girls at the studio at the
time you saw the broadcast?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. Yes, I remember the color of the clothes
worn by Toguri. Miss Toguri had a yellow dress.
Another girl had a dark dress. I mean black, ex-
cuse me.
vs. United States of America 705
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
Q. During the broadcast, did these girls refer
to themselves as Tokyo Rose?
A. I don’t think they did.
Q. Well, then, how do you know they were
ealled Tokyo Rose?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as calling for a con-
clusion, hearsay, incompetent, irrelevant and im-
material.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. It became a very famous program, and
being on the inside, many information can come to
the sub-committee. )
@. Then you received this information by way
of an official report to the foreign office?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, not the
best evidence, incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Not that, because this program was en-
tirely under the control of the army. The Foreign
Office, the Information Board, even the JOAK,
had no control over it.)
Q. Then all you know about the group of girls
being referred to as Tokyo Rose is what someone
else told you?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, incompe-
tent, irrelevant, and immaterial.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Yes, you see, I was in charge of this sub-
committee of the Board of Information which had
an office in the Radio Tokyo, while Itabashi, the
706 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
original chairman, was sick, and this sub-commit-
tee [24] was composed of representatives of the
Army, or shall I give you the names, the Army,
Mr. Norizane Ikeda, the Navy, I forget this name,
the Foreign Office, Board of Information, and
through this man Ikeda we used to obtain many
information. )
Q. Was it your duty to monitor at times the
Zero Hour?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead, Mr. Tamba.
A. That was not my duty.
Q. Did you ever monitor the Zero Hour pro-
gram?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. Sometimes somebody checked it but I never
did myself.
Q. From the Japanese standpoint, what was the
purpose of the Zero Hour program?
Mr. Collins: The defendant will object to that
on the ground that is calling for the opinion and
conclusion of the witness, it is hearsay, improper
cross-examination, and it is incompetent, irrele-
vant and immaterial.
Mr. DeWolfe: Well, no further objection is
necessary. We both agree on that one, then.
(A. Well, I think it was more or less the army’s
purpose to demoralize the American soldiers
down south. )
Mr. Collins: And then the next question too.
Mr. DeWolfe: I will agree it all go out if you
vs. United States of America 107
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
want to. Next one, anyone you want to go out;
it is all right with me.
(Q. In other words the Zero Hour program was
an instrument of psychological warfare?)
(A. Exactly.)
Mr. Collins: Then the next:
Q. And you of your own knowledge know that
Miss Toguri participated in that program?
Mr. DeWolfe: Just a minute. This is line 22?
Mr. Collins: Line 22.
Mr. Tamba: Line 24 is the answer, Mr.
DeW olfe.
Mr. DeWolfe: Line 24, all right, go ahead.
A. She was in the room, but I didn’t hear her.
Q. In your official capacity as a member of the
Board, did you [25] know that Miss Toguri was
participating in the Zero Hour program?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. Well, as I told you before, we had no offi-
‘cial control over this broadcast and my informa-
tion was indirect and I never—I only saw her once
in that studio, but at that time she was not broad-
easting.
Q. Had Yagi already gone to the United States
before Mr. Woods contacted you?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as irrelevant and in-
competent, sir.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yagi was in the United States.)
@. At the time of your conversation with Mr.
Woods? |
708 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant, and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Right.)
Q. In Mr. Woods’ conversation with you was
he attempting to find out what happened between
Yagi, Brundidge, and yourself?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as calling for a
conclusion, hearsay, incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. He was not trying to find that oun He
just mentioned about Yagi.)
Q. What was the purpose of confronting you
with Mr. Yagi, in Mr. Woods’ presence?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as calling for a
conclusion, hearsay, incompetent.
"The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I think to find out the truth.)
Q. When did this confrontation take place?
Soon after Yagi returned from the United States?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant, immaterial, hearsay.
The Court: Sustained. [26]
(A. Not soon, but a little later, about a week
and a half later.)
(). And at that time did you tell Mr. Woods es-
sentially what you told us today in this deposi-
tion?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
The Court: Same ruling.
vs. Umted States of America 709
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
(A. Yes. Just a moment, I want to make a
correction in that statement. Can I?)
©: Yes.
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, Your Honor.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. What I told Mr. Woods was mostly about
Yagi. If Yagi was with me when I saw this broad-
east. J repeatedly told him that Yagi was abso-
lutely not with me when I saw this broadcast.)
@. Then, when you told Mr. Woods that, that
led up to this confrontation with Yagi, that took
place later?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as hearsay, in-
competent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
Q. Mr. Kodaira, can you recall the date you
have the conversation with Major Tsuneishi con-
cerning the Major Cousens incident ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objection to that as incompetent,
and an objection was sustained on direct examina-
tion to it as hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. He came to see me around ten o’clock, 26th
of April, and then——)
Q. What year?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. This year. In April of this year, 1949.
Then we could not talk much at my office so I asked
710 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
him to come over to my place seven p.m. the next
day, that is April 27, 1949.)
Q. Did Major Tsuneishi also tell you that he
made the statement concerning Major Cousens to
the Australian authorities so as not to incriminate
himself ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as improper, and as
incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial, hearsay,
the same objection to the same matter sustained
on direct examination. [27]
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. He did not mention anything about him-
self. He regretted very much the denials he made
to this Australian investigator. )
(). And these denials were also for the purpose
of not incriminating himself as a war criminal?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir, same matter.
The Court: Sustained.
(A. No, he said he at that time didn’t know
which way the wind was blowing. He thought it
was concerning war crimes. )
Q. Mr. Kodaira, do you know Miss Toguri per-
sonally ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. No.
Q. Do you know Mr. Philip D’Aquino?
A. No.
Q. You have never talked to Mr. D’Aquino?
A. No.
Mr. Collins: Redirect examination by Mr.
'Tamba.
vs. United States of America 711
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
(Whereupon the redirect examination was
read, Mr. Collins reading the questions and
Mr. '’amba the answers. )
Q. Mr. Kodaira, have you had a conversation
with Mr. Yagi in the past week or ten days in which
he told you that when he was pressed to give your
name in San Francisco he first went to see Brun-
didge, before he mentioned your name.
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. He told me that when they pressed with
whom he saw the broadeast he went to Mr. Hogan
first, then Mr. Hogan referred him to Mr. Brun-
didge.)
Q. Then Brundidge told him to give your name?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, if the court
please.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. That is what he told me.)
Q. In your discussion with Mr. James Woods
there was no occasion to bring out Brundidge’s
name, is that correct?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
hearsay, calling for a conclusion. [28]
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. He asked me once if I met Mr. Brundidge.
I said, yes, but that was all.)
(). In the past few days has Mr. Yagi told you
that he made a full and complete statement regard-
712 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
ing this affair to Mr. Tillman of the F.B.1.?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. That is what he told me. He told me that
he mentioned Mr. Brundidge’s name six or seven
times. )
Q. Counsel has asked you about Zero Hour
broadcast demoralizing the American troops, do
you know of your own knowledge that it actually
demoralized American troops?
Mr. DeWolfe: Well, that is redirect examina-
tion, covering a matter taken up on cross-examina-
tion which he and myself agreed should go out on
cross-examination. He didn’t want it in, the an-
swer to it, and now this is on redirect. It is ob-
jected to as incompetent.
The Court: The objection 1s sustained.
(A. I think it didn’t work.)
Mr. Collins: Then the next portion reads as
follows:
“Tokyo, Japan, 28 May, 1949, by Mr. Tamba:
Mr. Ainsworth, this deposition of Toshikatsu Ko-
daira is opened by stipulation for the purpose of
offering certain items in evidence, please let the
record show this. Redirect examination by Mr.
Tamba.”’
(Whereupon the redirect examination by Mr.
Tamba under date of 28 May, 1949, referred
to above, was read, Mr. Collins reading the
questions and Mr. Tamba the answers.)
vs. United States of America 713
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
Q. Mr. Kodaira, I hand you three articles of
clothing and ask you what they are. What are
they, a suit of clothes?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.) [29]
@. And where did you first see that suit _of
clothes ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I saw itin Mr. Brundidge’s room at the Dai
Iti Hotel.)
@. On what occasion.
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. When I met him with Yagi the first time.)
Q. And is that the suit he gave you?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Yes.)
@. Has that suit been changed any, or altered,
since that. time?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objection to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, the coat and trousers.)
Q. What was done with them?
714 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of 'Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, if the Court
please.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Shortened to fit my size.)
@. Who did that altering?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial and
incompetent.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. My wife.)
(). I invite your attention to the item called
‘‘vest’’ and ask you whose name is that inside the
vest? (Witness shown vest.)
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection will be sustained.
(A. Harry Brundidge.)
Q. And bears No. 51985 and date of April 12,
1939? |
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial. [30]
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
Q. I show the trousers and particularly the left
rear pocket and ask you what appears there, if
anything? (Witness shown trousers.)
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Harry Brundidge.)
Q. And number 51985? And date April 12,
1939?
us. United States of America 715
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Correct.)
@. And you never saw that until I showed it
to you, is that true?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Same ruling.
wae That’s correct.) ’
Mr. Collins: And then by Mr. Tamba: ‘‘Let the
record show that no name appears 7
Mr. DeWolfe: Just a moment now, Mr. Collins.
Mr. ''amba wanted to make the record show that
the labels in this clothing, as testified to—that there
were none. I don’t think that is proper to go in
the record here at this time. He makes a state-
ment here as to certain labels in the clothing, Mr.
Tamba does, ‘*‘Let the record show so and so,’’ and
I object to that statement.
The Court: It may go out.
Mr. Collins: It simply said, ‘‘Let the record
show that no name appears on the coat * * *”’
Mr. DeWolfe: There is more than that.
Mr. Collins: Well, it doesn’t—I mean, it is
part and parcel of the deposition, if your Honor
please. It is a statement of counsel.
The Court: It may go out and let the jury dis-
regard it.
Mr. DeWolfe: Now the cross-examination
Mr. Collins: Just a moment, Mr. Dewolfe. The
716 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of 'Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
matter that is now stricken by the court and that
the court instructed the jury to disregard is that
matter which appears commencing by [381] Mr.
Tamba, on line 4, page 19 of the deposition, and
extending down to and including the material, or
the words, ‘‘Kodaira deposition,’’ line 9 of page
19 of the said deposition.
The Court: Let the record so show.
(By Mr. Tamba: Let the record show that no
name appears on the coat but that it shows the
label Oxford Clothes, purchased from D. & J. Wil-
liamson, Ine., St. Louis, Mo., and I offer these
three items as defendant’s exhibit ‘‘1’’ in Kodaira
deposition. )
Mr. DeWolfe: All right. The next is cross-
examination, sir; it is not offered by the United
States. |
Mr. Collins: The defendant will offer the cross-
examination of the witness by Mr. Storey.
(Whereupon the recross-examination was
read, the questions being read by Mr. Collins
and the answers by Mr. Tamba.)
Q. What did Mr. Brundidge say to you when
he gave you this suit?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Oh, I hesitated, and he said: ‘‘Take aim
and at the same time he said he gave another suit
to Takasumi Mitsui. I think that was all.)
Q. Did you take the suit to Mr. Mitsui?
vs. Umted States of America 717
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Who, did I?)
Q. Yes.
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. No.)
Q. Did Mr. Brundidge say anything else to you
at the time he gave you the suit?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, sir.
The Court: Objection sustained. [32]
(A. I don’t quite remember. )
Q. When did Mr. Brundidge give you this suit,
the first time you saw him?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, Your
Honor.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Right.)
Q. Did Mr. Brundidge give you anything else at
that time?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, may it please
the court.
The Court: Same ruling.
Mr. Collins: And the next page is an addenda to
said deposition, it is dated Tokyo, Japan, 2 June
1949, by Mr. Tamba: ‘‘Mr. Ainsworth, I am asking
that this deposition be reopened for the second time
for the purpose of asking a few brief questions.’’
718 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
(Whereupon redirect examination, dated 2
June 1949, was read, questions being read by
Mr. Collins and answers by Mr. Tamba.)
Q. Mr. Kodaira, on the first occasion when you
and Yagi met Mr. Brundidge at the Dai Iti Hotel
and after you had a discussion with him, did Brun-
didge leave the room, if you recall?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. As far as I can recall he left the room. He
left us two alone.)
Q. When you say us two, you mean you and
Yagi?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Yes, me and Yagi.)
@. And you and Yagi had a discussion?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial. Also hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, in Japanese.)
Q. Can you recall the substance of that discus-
sion ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, Judge.
The Court: Same ruling. [33]
(A. I cannot recall the conversation in- Japanese
with Yagi, but I told him that to stand as a wit-
ness is a very serious matter. )
vs. United States of America 719
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
Q@. Then did Brundidge return to the room
later ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, ir-
relevant and immaterial.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Yes, he did.)
Q. Now, did Brundidge say anything to you on
that occasion or on the second occasion, if you re-
eall, indicating that he was anxious to have two
witnesses ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Well, he did not suggest clearly, but I re-
ceived that impression. )
Q@. What impression did you receive?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as calling for a con-
clusion, hearsay.
The Court: The objection is sustained.
(A. Of trying to get Yagi and I.)
Q. Now, referring to the second meeting with
Brundidge, which was on the following day, and
after you had told him you would not testify, did
you have a discussion with him regarding Niseis?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes.)
Q. What was said by you with reference to
Niseis and what was said by him if you recall?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, your
Honor.
The Court: Sustained.
720 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
(A. Well, I told him about the plight of the
Niseis in Japan, especially when they were caught
in a war, and then I inferred that Niseis were not
treated good over here, in Japan, and they were
not’ treated decently in the United States either.)
Q. What did he say when you made that state-
ment? [34]
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, sir.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. He told me, sharply, that the Niseis were
getting good treatment since the war, especially in
the Eastern part of the United States, and then he —
mentioned Niseis in Chicago. ) |
Q. Then did he get into a discussion about Iva
again ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent and
hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, he did.) _
@. What did he say, if you can remember ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. He said: ‘‘In America they don’t hang
women, and after the trial and after sentence she
ean live in America forever.’’)
Q@. Was that toward the end of your discussion
with him?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent and
irrelevant.
The Court: Objection sustained.
vs. United States of America TA
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira.)
(A. Yes.)
Q. Then what did you do and what did he do?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as immaterial and
incompetent.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Then I thanked him and shook hands with
him and left the room with Yagi.)
Mr. Collins: Then recross-examination by Mr.
Storey.
Mr. DeWolfe: Which is not offered by the
United States.
Mr. Collins: The defendant will offer recross-
examination of the witness by Mr. Storey.
(Whereupon recross-examination was read,
Mr. Collins reading the questions and Mr.
Tamba the answers. )
Q. Did you ever meet and talk to Mrs.
D’Aquino ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead.
A. Mrs. D’Aquino, no.
@. Did you ever see Mrs. D’Aquino while she
was at the radio station broadcasting ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Go ahead. [35]
A. Mrs. D’Aquino, again?
i). Yes.
A. I saw her once. I think I mentioned earlier
that she was not broadcasting then.
Q. So far as you personally know that is the
only thing you know concerning Mrs. D’Aquino
and her activities ? A. That’s right.
Q. What specifically, did Mr. Brundidge say to
722 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
you which led you to believe that he was looking for
two witnesses ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. At the first session excuse me, the first meet-
ing with Mr. Brundidge he repeatedly said, if I
remember correctly, the way to say as two wit-
nesses, Yagi and I saw her.)
Q. Is that all he said concerning two witnesses?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Yes.)
Q. And from that you gained the impression
that he was looking for two witnesses ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection calling for a con-
clusion, likewise.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. That’s right.)
Q. Do you recall that I asked you in one of the
other depositions if you recall any further conver-
sation between you and Brundidge, in which you
answered, ‘‘No’’.
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as calling for hear-
say.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Mr. Collins: Then, by Mr. T'iamba: ‘‘I will stip-
ulate that that was asked of the witness and that he
answered ‘‘No’’. |
Mr. DeWolfe: Move that that statement by Mr.
Tamba go out.
vs. United States of America 723
(Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira. )
The Court: Objection sustained, let it go out.
Mr. Collins: Question by Mr. Tamba:
Q. Can you recall anything else that Mr. Brun-
didge said to you that you have not already given
us in this deposition ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay, sir.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. No, I don’t think I can recall anything else
at the moment.) [36]
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss:
I do solemnly swear that I will truly and impar-
tially take down in notes and faithfully transcribe
the testimony of Toshikatsu Kodaira, a witness
now to be examined. So help me God.
/s/ MILDRED MATZ.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 23rd day
of May, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the
United States of America.
[American Consular Service Seal. ]
. Service No. 964a; Tariff No. 38; No fee pre-
scribed.
724 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss:
CERTIFICATE
I, Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the
United States of America in and for Tokyo, Japan,
duly commissioned and qualified, acting under the
authority of a certain stipulation for taking oral
designations abroad, and upon order of the United
States District Court, made and entered March 22,
1949, in the Matter of United States of America,
Plaintiff, vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, Defend-
ant, pending in the Southern Division of the United
States District Court, for the Northern District of
California, and at issue between United States of
America vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, do hereby
certify that in pursuance of the aforesaid stipula-
tion and court order and at: the request of Theodore
Tamba, counsel for the defendant Iva Ikuko Toguri
D’Aquino I examined Toshikatsu Kodaira, at my
office in Room 335, Mitsui Main Bank Building,
Tokyo, Japan, on the twenty-third day of May,
A.D. 1949, on the twenty-eighth day of May, A.D. —
1949, and on the second day of June, A.D. 1949,
and that the said witness being to me personally
known and known to me to be the same person
named and described in the interrogatories, being
by me first sworn to testify the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth in answer to the
several interrogatories and cross-interrogatories in
vs. Umted States of America V9 33)
the cause in which the aforesaid stipulation, court
order, and request for deposition issued, his evi-
dence was taken down and transcribed under my
direction by Mildred Matz, a stenographer who was
by me first duly sworn truly and impartially to
take down in notes and faithfully transcribe the
testimony of the said witness Toshikatsu Kodaira,
and after having been read over and corrected by
him, was subscribed by him in my presence, and I
further certify that I am not counsel or kin to any
of the parties to this cause or in any manner inter-
ested in the result thereof.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand
and seal of office at Tokyo, Japan, this second day
of June, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the
United States of America.
[American Consular Service Seal.]
Service No. 1096; Tariff No. 38; No fee pre-
scribed.
[Endorsed]: Filed May 13, 1949.
726 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
In the Southern Division of the United States Dis-
trict Court for the Northern Division of Cali-
fornia.
No. 31712 R
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
VS.
IVA IKUKO TOGURI D’AQUINO,
Defendant.
DEPOSITION OF J. A. ABRANCHES PINTO
Deposition of J. A. Abranches Pinto, taken be-
fore me, Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the
United States of America, in Mitsui Main Bank
Building, Room 335, in Tokyo, Japan, under the
authority of a certain stipulation for taking oral
designations abroad, and upon order of the United
States District Court, made and entered March
22, 1949, in the Matter of the United States of
America vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, pending
in the Southern Division of the United States Dis-
trict Court, for the Northern District of Califor-
nia, and at issue between the United States of
America vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino.
The plaintiff, appearing by Frank J. Hennessy,
United States District Attorney; Thomas DeWolfe,
Special Assistant to the Attorney General, and
Noel Storey, Special Assistant to the Attorney Gen-
vs. United States of America 727
eral, and the defendant, appearing by Wayne N.
Collins and Theodore Tamba.
The said interrogations and answers to the wit-
ness thereto were taken stenographically by Mildred
Matz and were then transcribed by her under my
direction, and the said transcription being there-
after read over correctly to the said witness by
me and then signed by said witness in my pres-
ence.
It is stipulated that all objections of each of the
parties hereto, including the objections to the form
of the questions propounded to the witness and to
the relevancy, materiality and competency thereof,
and the defendant’s objections to the use of the
deposition, or any part of the deposition, by plain- —
tiff, on the plaintiff’s case in chief, shall be re-
served to the time of trial in this cause.
J. A. ABRANCHES PINTO
of Tokyo, Japan, Portuguese Consul in Tokyo,
Japan, of lawful age, being by me duly sworn,
deposes and says:
Direct Examination
By Mr. amba:
Q. Mr. Pinto, you are the consul for the Re-
public of Portugal in Tokyo, Japan? A. Yes.
Q. And you know Philip D’Aquino?
m. Yes. .
Q. Is he a citizen and national of the Republic
of Portugal ? A. Yes, I consider him so.
Q. Jam referring to the son, Philip D’Aquino?
728 Iva Ikuko Toguni D’ Aquino
(Deposition of J. A. Abranches Pinto.)
A. Yes, the son.
Q. I hand you a document dated April 4, 1944,
and ask you what that is (document handed to
witness) ? |
A. Yes, this is a certification of nationality of
Filipe Jairus D’Aquino.
Q. Of whom? A. Portuguese nationality.
@. Who is the person mentioned ?
A. Filipe Jairus D’Aquino, the husband of To-
guri D’Aquino, and. this is the usual document for
Portuguese citizens in Japan.
Mr. Tamba: I offer this document as defend-
ant’s exhibit ‘‘1’’ in Pinto deposition.
Q. Mr. Pinto, did you attend the wedding of
Philip D’Aquino and Iva Toguri D’Aquino at So-
phia University ? A. Yes.
@. And you were Mr. D’Aquino’s best man, as
I recall?
A. Well, I signed the registration papers.
(). At the church?
A. At the church I signed it. As a witness, or
best man, if you eall it that, but of course in a
private capacity.
Q. Not official capacity?
A. Not official capacity.
@. I hand you a document dated June 18, 1945,
and ask you what that is, Mr. Pinto (document
shown to witness).
A. After they registered the marriage in the
Portuguese Consulate I posted this little bulletin
to certify that they have married and registered
vs. Umited States of America 729
(Deposition of J. A. Abranches Pinto.)
the marriage in the Portuguese Consulate.
Mr. Tamba: I offer this document in evidence as
defendant’s exhibit ‘‘2’’ in Pinto deposition.
@. I am now referring to exhibit °‘1’’ which
was offered, and ask you is that your signature at
the bottom of that document? A. Yes.
@. Is that the seal of your government?
im Yes.
Q. I now refer to exhibit ‘2’? which I offered,
and ask you if that is your signature appearing
thereon ? Ae XVEs; (3*]
Q. And that is the seal of your government
which appears on it? A. Yes.
Q. I hand you a document dated November 4,
1948, Mr. Pinto, and ask you what that document
is (document shown to witness).
A. This is a transcription from the books in
the Portuguese Consulate of the marriage of
D’Aquino and Toguri D’Aquino in the Catholic
Church. It is in the Portuguese Consulate books
and this is a full transcription.
@. That is your signature on the second page
at the bottom of the document? me Yes:
@. And that is the seal of your government on
this document ? Aw Ges:
Mr. Tamba: I offer this document, together
with the English translation, which the witness has
read, in evidence as defendant’s exhibit ‘‘3’’ in
Pinto deposition.
*Page numbering appearing at bottom of page of original
Reporter’s Transcript.
730 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of J. A. Abranches Pinto.)
Q. Mr. Pinto, I hand you a document dated
November 4, 1948, and ask you what that docu-
ment is? (Witness shown document.)
A. This is the document which certifies that
Mr. Filipe D’Aquino is a Portuguese citizen.
@. And he was born when?
A. I don’t know why he asked for such a docu-
ment.
Q. Is that your signature on this paper?
A. Yes.
@. And that is the seal of your government on
this paper? A. Yes.
Mr. Tamba: I offer this document in evidence
as defendant’s exhibit ‘*4’’ in Pinto deposition.
Q. I hand you another document, Mr. Pinto,
dated November 4, 1948, [4] and ask you what that
is (witness shown document).
A. I suppose Mr. D’Aquino asked me for a
legal certificate of his registration in the Portu-
guese Consulate when he was born. All the docu-
ments in the Portuguese Consulate in Yokohama
were lost in 1923 in the big earthquake. Then, of
eourse I could not pass such a document. Could
not give him. Then I certified that such a thing
happened and it is impossible to furnish a certifi-
cate of registration of birth of Filipe D’Aquino,
married, born in Yokohama on 26 March, 1921,
son of Jose Filomeno D’Aquino and Maria
D’Aquino. I cannot pass the document because
it was burned. I cannot pass the document. Orig-
us. United States of America Ted
(Deposition of J. A. Abranches Pinto.)
inal document I cannot furnish. Copy of the origi-
nal document I cannot furnish because the books
were lost.
Q. When you use the word ‘‘pass’’ you mean
you cannot deliver the document because it was
destroyed in the fire?
Mr. Tamba: I offer this document together
with English translation thereof as defendant’s ex-
hibit ‘‘5’’ in Pinto deposition.
Q. By the way, Mr. Pinto, is that your signa-
ture at the bottom of this document, exhibit ‘‘5’’?
im Yes.
@. And the seal thereon is the seal of your gov-
ernment ? A. Yos:
Q. Mr. Pinto, this exhibit which I refer to as
exhibit ‘‘5’’ with the translation, is in lieu of a
birth certificate because the birth certificate was
destroyed ? A. Yes.
Q. Now, Mr. Pinto, I show you document dated
10 September, 1946, and ask you if the signature
appearing on the right-hand of that is your signa-
ture? (Document shown to witness.)
= Yes.
Q. And the seal of your country? [5]
=. Yes.
. Whose signature is that on the left-hand
side? A. Mrs. Toguri D’Aquino.
(. She signed that Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino.
m. Yes.
Mr. lamba: I offer this document as defend-
Tae Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of J. A. Abranches Pinto. )
ant’s exhibit ‘“‘6’’ in Pinto deposition, together
with English translation thereof.
Q. And that (referring to exhibit ‘‘6’’) is a cer-
tificate of registration of Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino
with the Portuguese Consul in Tokyo, Japan, on
10 September, 1946? A. Yes.
@. I hand you another document, Mr. Pinto,
dated 20 June, 1945, is that your signature on the
right hand side (witness shown document) ?
AL Yes:
@. And this is the seal of your country on this
document ? A. Yes.
Q. To the left of your signature there is another
one, whose signature is that?
A. Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino.
Q. Signed in your presence ? A. Yes.
Q. Registered in your office? A. Yes.
Q. This document together with the one which
I just showed you as defendant’s exhibit ‘‘6,”’ these ©
contain photographs of Mrs. D’Aquino?
A. Yes.
Mr. Tamba: I offer this document as defendant’s
exhibit ‘‘7’’ in Pinto deposition. [6]
Q. I now hand you another document dated
June 30th, 1947, and ask you what that is. (Docu-
ment exhibited to witness. )
|
A. Certificate of registration of Filipe Jairus
D’ Aquino.
Q. Is this your signature on the document (in-
dicating ) ? A. Yes.
vs. United States of America 733
(Deposition of J. A. Abranches Pinto. )
Q. And the seal of your government appears
on it? A. Yes.
Q. And the signature of Filipe J. D’Aquino?
im Yes.
Mr. Tamba: I offer this document, together
with a translation thereof, in evidence as defend-
ant’s exhibit No. ‘*8’’ in Pinto deposition.
Q. Exhibit ‘‘1’’ which we offered in this depo-
sition, what is that document, Mr. Pinto? What
is this document? ‘Tell us for the purpose of the
record ?
A. Certificate of nationality of Filipe Jairus
D’Aquino as a Portuguese citizen.
Q. Referring to Exhibit °‘6’’ in this deposi-
tion, what is that, sir?
A. Certificate of Portuguese nationality of
Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino by marriage with Filipe
Jairus D’Aquino, as a Portuguese citizen, bears
date 10 September, 1946.
®, Exhibit ‘‘7,’’ what is that, sir?
A. Certificate of nationality of Toguri D’Aquino
as a Portuguese citizen.
@. That is by virtue of marriage with a Portu-
guese citizen, Filipe D’Aquino ? A. Yes.
Q. And that has your signature?
A. Marriage with Portuguese citizen, Filipe
Jairus D’Aquino.
Q. Dated June 20, 1945? A. Yes.
@. Mr. Pinto, how long have you been a resi-
dent of Japan? [7]
734 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of J. A. Abranches Pinto.)
A. I have been in Japan for thirty-two years.
Q. And you have been Portuguese Consul for
how many years?
A. I think I have been Consul since I come to
Japan in 1917 up to I am not sure but I think up
to middle of 1921 and aftér that I left the Con-
sulate for a while, I don’t know how many years,
but I think about five years maybe, and after five
years the Consulate in Yokohama was vacated, see,
and the Portuguese Minister here asked me again
to become the Consul for Portuguese and I said
on condition that the Consulate be moved to Tokyo
because I was living in Tokyo. Then I became
Consul for Portuguese up to now. I think from
1926 maybe I became Consul in Tokyo, or ’25, I
am not sure.
@. And you have been Portuguese Consul in
Tokyo ever since 1925 or ’26 up to the present
time ? A. Yes.
Q. As Portuguese Consul have you had occa-
sion to familiarize yourself with regard to the
laws of Portugal with reference to registration of
citizens and acquisition of Portuguese nationality?
A. Yes. |
Q. You have acquired that through your ex-
perience as a Portuguese Consul? A. Yes.
Q. Your experience on that subject of the law
has been acquired by reading Portuguese law books |
and from your experience as Portuguese Consul?
A. Yes.
a
vs. United States of America 739
(Deposition of J. A. Abranches Pinto.)
Q. Will you state, Mr. Pinto, whether or not
according to the law of Portugal the marriage of
an adult woman citizen of the United States to
an adult male Portuguese citizen in Tokyo, Japan,
on April 19, 1945, in and of itself conferred upon
that woman the nationality and citizenship of Por-
tugal? my Yes» [8i
mo It did?
A. Yes, according to Portuguese law, yes.
Q. Will you state whether or not according to
the law of Portugal the formal registration of such
a marriage by such husband and wife or by either
of them at the Consulate of Portugal in Tokyo,
Japan, constituted a formal acquisition of Portu-
guese nationality by said woman, or by the wife?
A Yes.
Q. It did? A. Yes.
Q. Mr. Pinto, Mrs. Iva Toguri D’Aquino was
born in California of Japanese parents?
A. Yes.
@. And in consequence was a citizen of the
United States by birth? A. Yes.
In July, 1941, she left the United States?
Yes.
She took up residence in Tokyo, Japan?
Yes.
Thereafter she was united, she was married
on bpril 19, 1945, at Tokyo, Japan, according to
the rites of the Roman Catholic Church at Sophia
University Chapel, to Philip D’Aquino, a national
OPoOoPe
736 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of J. A. Abranches Pinto.)
and citizen of Portugal residing in Japan, who is
one-fourth Portuguese and three-fourths Japanese
blood ? A. Yes.
Q. Can you state whether or not according to
the law of Portugal by virtue of said marriage, in
and of itself, she then and there became a national
and citizen of Portugal? A. Yes.
Q. She did become a national and citizen of
Portugal? A. Yes.
Q. Have you the Portuguese law on that sub-
ject with you? A. Yes. [9]
Q. May we see the books, sir?
A. (Witness produces two books, which he con-
sults.) ' This is the Civil Code. This article, Arti-
cle 18 of the Code, has been modified.
@. Where does it provide that Mrs. D’Aquino
became a Portuguese citizen? A. Where?
@. Where in the book?
A. Article 18, Portuguese Citizens.
Q. Don’t read any of the paragraphs in that
book other than those which apply to her.
A. (Witness reads.) ‘‘No. 6. The foreign
woman who marries with a Portuguese citi-
zen * es ee Ode) °
(). Becomes a citizen and national of Portugal?
A. The new one is the same, yes. (Witness
reads from book.) ‘‘The foreign woman that mar-
ries with a Portuguese citizen * * *”’
Q. She becomes a citizen and national of Por-
tugal? . A. Yes. |
vs. Umted States of America 737
(Deposition of J. A. Abranches Pinto.)
Q. J want to ask you another question. That
woman acquires Portuguese citizenship by virtue
of the fact that she is married outside of the United
States ?
A. Even if she married in the United States
she would become a Portuguese citizen.
Q@. But she could not claim the benefits of the
Portuguese law had she married in the United
States ? A. Yes, she could not.
@. But because she married in Japan to a Por-
tuguese citizen she can claim the benefit of the
Portuguese law? A. Yes.
Q. Incidentally, are you familiar with Machado
Villela ? me, Mes.
Q. Who is he? [10]
A. Well, he was a lawyer, or a teacher of law,
and is a well known international lawyer.
Q. He is a Portuguese international lawyer?
mm 6 CS.
@. He published a book in 1921? A. Yes.
A. That book is Tratado Elementar de Direito
Internacional Privado ? ie Ves.
Q. And the opinion you have expressed here
this morning is confirmed in that book?
A. What is that?
Q. The opinion which you expressed here is
confirmed by Mr. Villela?
A. Is according to the Tratado Elementar de
Direito Internacional Privado.
@. For the purpose of the record, the Book
738 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of J. A. Abranches Pinto.)
No. 1 published in 1921, paragraph 38, page 116,
you delivered the book to the Minister and it is
in the Minister’s office? A. Yes.
Cross-Examination
By Mr. Storey:
Q. Mr. Pinto, who is the chief of the Ministry
of the Portuguese Government in Tokyo, Japan?
A. Mr. Franco Nogueira.
Q. Are you familiar with Mr. Nogueira’s sig-
nature ? A. Yes.
Q. I hand you a document, Mr. Pinto, which
is offered as Government’s Exhibit ‘‘1,’’ in con-
nection with this deposition, and ask you if you’
ean identify the signature appearing on this docu-
ment ?
Mr. Tamba: Document is objected to upon the
ground that no proper foundation has been laid,
and constitutes hearsay. [11]
Q. Is that Mr. Nogueira’s signature on the docu-
ment referred to?
A. Yes. Excuse me, well, of course it is his sig-
nature but usually he writes his signature com-
plete: ‘‘Franco Nogueira.’’ Here, in Portuguese,
we call it rubrica only. Of course it is his rubrica
but usually he signs it Franco Nogueira. At least
that is the signature I know.
Q. Is that (pointing to seal on Government’s
exhibit ‘‘1’’) the official seal of the Portuguese Le-
gation on the bottom ? A. Yes.
us. United States of America 739
(Deposition of J. A. Abranches Pinto.)
Q. Has Mr. Nogueira ever discussed the citi-
zenship of Mrs. Iva D’Aquino with you?
A. He has with me sometimes, yes, especially
later, course.
Q. Is Mr. Nogueira an attorney by profession
in Portugal?
A. Well, of course, he has the law course in
Portugal, but I don’t know if he was. I suppose
he was for a short time, I think so.
Q. Do you know of your own knowledge that
he was?
A. Actually at present I don’t know. Natur-
ally he can be if he likes to be, he can be a lawyer
in Portugal.
Q. Has Mr. Nogueira been trained in the legal
profession in Portugal ? A. Yes.
Q. Has Mr. Nogueira finished all the educa-
tional requirements to become an attorney?
me Yes.
Q. To your own knowledge do you know if No-
gueira 1s a member of the bar?
A. This I don’t know. I am not sure.
Q. In your discussions with Mr. Nogueira con-
cerning the citizenship of Mrs. D’Aquino, has he
informed you that there is some controversy
A. Yes, he did.
Q. Concerning the fact that Philip D’Aquino is
a Portugal national? [12]
A. There is some doubt about the father’s na-
tionality. Of course if the father is not a Portu-
740 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of J. A. Abranches Pinto.)
guese the son will not be a Portuguese, but——
(). And at the present time is there an investi-
gation going on concerning the nationality of Mr.
Philip D’Aquino?
A. Yes, the father D’Aquino.
Q. When Mrs. D’Aquino was married to Philip
D’Aquino, you have testified, she acquired Portu-
guese citizenship ? A. Yes.
Q. At that time did she lose her American
citizenship ?
A. I don’t know, according to the American
law.
Q. Did Mrs. D’Aquino discuss with you at the
time she proposed to be married to Philip D’Aquino
the possibility of losing her American citizenship?
A. No.
Q@. As a result of this marriage?
A. No, we did not discuss it at that time.
Q. Mr. Pinto, was Mr. Nogueira a witness to
the marriage? A. No, he was not in Japan.
@. Has Mr. Nogueira asked you since the war
if Mrs. D’Aquino had a conversation with you be-
fore she was married as to whether or not she would
lose her American citizenship if she married Philip
D’ Aquino ?
A. Since the war? You mean when the war
started ?
Q. Since the war has been over?
A. If I had some conversation——
Q. With Mr. Nogueira about the loss of the
us. United States of America 741
(Deposition of J. A. Abranches Pinto.)
American citizenship of Mrs. D’Aquino in the
event she married Mr. D’Aquino?
A. Of course, when the question of Mrs.
D’Aquino as Tokyo Rose began, sometimes the ques-
tion is, ‘‘is she a Portuguese citizen while she is
married to D’Aquino; he is a Portuguese citizen,
of course; she is a Portuguese because she was
married with [13] D’Aquino in June, 1945.”’
Q. You are positive that Mrs. D’Aquino did
not discuss with you prior to the time she married
Philip D’Aquino the possibility of losing her Amer-
ican citizenship in the event she were married to
Mr. D’Aquino?
A. No. I think about nationality we discussed
nothing at that time but, of course, I think when
they were married they knew that she became a
Portuguese citizen. It is according to Portuguese
Jaw that any Portuguese marries with a foreigner
that foreigner becomes a Portuguese. It is a fact.
Q. Did Mrs. D’Aquino tell you she wanted to
retain her American citizenship when she married
D’ Aquino?
A. She did not tell anything about that. She
told me her nationality and I told her it is written
in the marriage document the place she was born
and her American citizenship
@. And you gave Mrs. D’Aquino no advice
Whatever as to the loss of her American citizenship
as a result of this marriage?
A. I have no idea to inform her on that.
742 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of J. A. Abranches Pinto.)
Mr. Storey: I want to make sure the record
states that I reserve objection to the documents
introduced into evidence in connection with this
deposition, until the time of trial.
Redirect Examination
By Mr. Tamba:
Q. You have known Philip D’Aquino’s father
for many years? A. Yes.
@. And you know he is a Portuguese citizen
and national? A. Yes.
@. The records of his registration have been
destroyed, is that correct? A. Yes.
Q. Where, in what office?
A. In Portuguese Consulate in Yokohama. [14]
Q. He is presently registered in your office as
a national and citizen of Portgual?
A. The father?
Q. Yes.
A. The father was registered already, when I
arrived in Japan.
Q. Registered and known as a_ Portuguese
citizen and national ?
A. Yes, when I arrived.
Q. In Yokohama? A. Yes.
Q. That office was destroyed by an earthquake?
Evy CS:
Q. And you know that of your own knowledge?
A. Yes.
us. United States of America 743
(Deposition of J. A. Abranches Pinto.)
Q. And he is presently registered in your office?
A. Registered in 1923 by the former Consul.
Q. He is registered now in your office?
A. Yes, in my office.
Q. Mr. Storey has referred to a document, which
is marked Government’s Exhibit ‘‘1,’’ that does not
ehange your opinion in any wise, does it?
A. No.
@. And that is, if she were (voluntarily) living
in America, or if she had married there it would be
a different situation than if she was married in
Japan?
A. No, it does not change my opinion.
/s/ J. A. ABRANCHES PINTO.
Japan,
City of Tokyo
American Consular Service—ss.
I do solemnly swear that I will truly and impar-
tially take down in notes and faithfully transcribe
the testimony of J. A. Abranches Pinto, a witness
now to be examined. So help me God.
/s/ MILDRED MATZ.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 13th day
of May, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the
United States of America.
[American Consular Service Seal.]
Service No. 876a; Tariff No. 38; No fee prescribed.
744 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss.
CERTIFICATE
J, Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the
United States of America in and for Tokyo, Japan,
duly commissioned and qualified, acting under the
authority of a certain stipulation for taking oral
designations abroad and upon order of the United
States District Court, made and entered March 22,
1949, in the Matter of United States of America,
Plaintiff, vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, Defend-
ant, pending in the Southern Division of the United
States District Court, for the Northern District of
California, and at issue between United States of
America vs. Iva [kuko Toguri D’Aquino, do hereby
certify that in pursuance of the aforesaid stipula-
tion and court order and at the request of Theo-
dore Tamba, counsel for the defendant Iva Ikuko
Toguri D’Aquino, I examined J. A. Abranches
Pinto, at my office in Room 335, Mitsui Main
Bank Building, Tokyo, Japan, on the thirteenth
day of May, A.D. 1949, and that the said witness
being to me personally known and known to
me to be the same person named and described
in the interrogatories, being by me first sworn to
testify the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth in answer to the several interrogatories
and cross-interrogatories in the cause in which the
us. United States of America 745
aforesaid stipulation, court order, and request for
deposition issued, his evidence was taken down and
transcribed under my direction by Mildred Matz,
a stenographer, who was by me first duly sworn
truly and impartially to take down in notes and
faithfully transcribe the testimony of the said wit-
ness J. A. Abranches Pinto, and after having read
over and corrected by him, was subscribed by him
in my presence; and I further certify that I am
not counsel or kin to any’‘of the parties to this
cause or In any manner interested in the result
thereof.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand
and seal of office at Tokyo, Japan, this 26th day of
May, A.D. 1949.
/sf THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the
United States of America.
[American Consular Service Seal. ]
Service No. 998; Tariff No. 38; No fee prescribed.
[Endorsed]: Filed June 9, 1949.
DEFENDANT’S EXHIBIT NO. 1
IN PINTO DEPOSITION
(Translation )
Consulate of Portugal
(Coat of Arms)
Tokyo
Service of the Portuguese Republic
Certificate of Consular Registry No. 90
Lhe Consul of the Portuguese Republic in Tokyo,
746 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
Makes it known that Felipe Jairus D’Aquino; Mar-
ital status single (Note of translator: The word
‘‘single’’ was lined out and replace by pencil writ-
ing ‘‘married’’), profession, newspaperman, son of
Jose Filomeno d’Aquino and of Maria d’Aquino,
born on the 26th day of March of 192], a native of
Yokohama, is a Portuguese citizen and is duly reg-
istered in the Register of this Consulate under No.
5 of Book No. 1 of inscriptions.
His last residence was Yokohama and he arrived
on (date in blank) at this consular district.
He resides in Tokyo, 4 T’amuracho, 6-chome,
Shiba-ku.
He proved his identity by consular inscription.
Portuguese Consulate in Tokyo, on April 4, 1944.
Signature of the person being
registered,
/s/ F. DDAQUINO.
/s/ J. A. ABRANCHES PINTO,
Consul.
(Rubber Stamp): Consulate of Portugal—Tokyo.
(Photograph).
(Rubber Stamp): Consulate of Portugal—Tokyo.
Characteristics: Height, 1,65 meters; Hair, black; —
Face, oval; Beard, has not; Eyes, brown; Nose, |
regular; Mouth, regular; Color, white..
This certificate is valid for the period of one year. —
(Stamp): Portuguese Republic 12$00 (escudos)
Consular Service.
(Rubber Stamp): Consulate of Portugal—Tokyo. |
vs. United States of America 747
Paid at the rate or 0.20 the amount of Y 2.40 in
accordance with Item No. 1 of the table of rates,
this amount being entered in the book of entries
under No. 1615. Tokyo, April 4, 1944.
/s/ A. PINTO.
(Rubber Stamp): American Consular Service,
Tokyo, Japan.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH
American Vice Consul.
On the back:
‘‘Revalidated for the period of two years until
April 3, 1947. Portuguese Consulate in Tokyo,
June 21, 1945.”’
/s/ J. A. ABRANCHES PINTO.
(Rubber Stamp): Consulate of Portugal, Tokyo.
(Rubber Stamp): Gratis.
Translator’s affidavit attached.
U. S. Consular Service certificate attached.
[Endorsed]: Filed Sept. 2, 1949. U.S. D. C.
Defts. Ex. EE.
DEFENDANT’S EXHIBIT NO. 2
IN PINTO DEPOSITION
(Translation )
Consulate of Portugal
(Coat of Arms)
Marriage Certificate
On the 18th day of June, 1945, was transeribed
at this Consulate the marriage, celebrated in con-
748 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
formity with the canonic laws, of Felipe J.
D’Aquino, a native of Yokohama, Japan, son of
Jose Filomeno D’Aquino and of Maria D’Aquino
with Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, a native of Los Ange-
les, California, daughter of Jun Toguri and of
Fumi Toguri. :
Consulate of Portugal in Tokyo, on the 18th day
of June, 1945.
/s/ J. A. ABRANCHES PINTO,
Consul.
(Rubber Stamp): Consulate of Portugal—Tokyo.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
American Vice Consul.
(Rubber Stamp): American Consular Service,
Tokyo, Japan.
Translator’s affidavit attached.
U. S. Consular Service certificate attached.
[Endorsed]: Filed Sept. 2, 1949. U. 8. D. C.
Defts. Ex. FF.
DEFENDANT’S EXHIBIT NO. 3 IN PINTO
DEPOSITION
(Translation )
Consulate of Portugal
Tokyo
I, Joao do Amaral Abranches Pinto, Consul of
Portugal in Tokyo, Japan........ Do hereby certify
that in the book of records and transcriptions of |
marriages of this Consulate of Portugal in Tokyo, |
vs. United States of America 749
on the back of page seven, page eight and back,
there appears the record of marriage as follows:
r Record No. 5—At the request of Filipe
Jairus Testus d’Aquino, J, Joao do Amaral Ab-
ranches Pinto, Consul of Portugal in Tokyo, tran-
scribe hereunder the following record of marriage,
performed in conformity with the canonic laws of
the Catholic Chapel annexed to Sophia University
of Tokyo, in Kojimachi-ku, Tokyo, on the nine-
teenth day of the month of April, in the year
nineteen hundred and forty-five, before the Rever-
Seeeeeicy J. B. Kraus, 8.d.............5..2-5--
On the nineteenth day of the month of April in the
year nineteen hundred and forty-five, in the chapel
annexed to the Catholic Sophia University of Tokyo,
in Kojimachi-ku, Tokyo, before the Reverend Father
J. B. Kraus, S.J. the following performed their
marriage: the bridgegroom Filipe Jairus Testus
d’Aquino, newspaperman, residing in this capital,
single, a native of Yokohama, Japan, born on the
twenty-sixth day of March, in the year nineteen
hundred and twenty-one, legitimate son of Jose
Filomeno d’Aquino and Maria d’Aquino, and the
bride: [kuko Toguri, residing in this capital, single,
North-American citizen, a native of Los Angeles,
California, United States of North America, born
on the fourth day of July, in the year nineteen
hundred and eighteen, legitimate daughter of Jun
Toguri and Fumi Toguri, her name becoming Ikuko
MU OGINTIG, ee eee
And for the records, I transcribe this marriage rec-
750 Iva Lkuké Togurni D’ Aquino
ord in accordance with the terms of Article 36 of
Decree Number 29970, published in the Government
Diary Number 240 of October 18, of the year 1939,
and in the Portuguese Civil Code, on presentation
of the proofs, which are annexed to this record at
the request of the bridegroom. Consulate of Por-
tugal in Tokyo, on the eighteenth day of the Month
of June, in the year nineteen hundred and forty-
five.
/s/ J. A. ABRANCHES PINTO,
Consul.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
American Vice Consul.
[(Stamped): American Consular Service. ]
There follows the receipt of consular emoluments.
Paid at the rate of exchange of 0.20 the amount of
Forty Esecudos (y 8.00) in accordance with item 20
of the table of rates, this amount being entered in
the book of entries under No. 1620. Tokyo, June
18, 1945.—Signed, A. Pinto.—Fiscal stamp of the
Consular Service duly authenticated by a rubber
stamp reading: Consulate of Portugal—Tokyo.....
Nothing else appearing in the record that I am con-
sulting, [ issued these presents, to which is affixed
a stamp of this Consulate, signed by me on the -
fourth day of the month of November, in the year
nineteen hundred and forty-eight................. :
Consulate of Portugal in Tokyo, on November 4, ©
1948.
/s/ J. A. ABRANCHES PINTO,
Consul.
vs. United States of America Tol
(Rubber stamp): Consulate of Portugal—Tokyo.
(Stamp): (Portuguese Republic, 40$00, Con-
sular Service. )
(Rubber stamp): Paid at the rate of 11.00 the
amount of Y440.00 (Escudos 40800) in accordance
with item 25 of the table of rates, this amount being
entered in the book of entries under number 258.
Tokyo, November 4, 1918.
/8/ A. PINTO.
THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
American Vice Consul.
(Stamped): American Consular Service.
(Consular Seal over wax.)
U.S. Consular Service Certificate attached.
[Endorsed]: Filed Sept. 2, 1949. U.S.D.C. Defts.
Ex. GG.
DEFENDANT’S EXHIBIT NO. 4 IN PINTO
DEPOSITION
Portuguese Consulate
Tokyo
To whom it may concern,
This is to certify that, Mr. Filipe Jairus
d’Aquino, born in Yokohama on 26th March, 1921,
married to Mrs. Ikuko Toguri d’Aquino, is a
Portuguese national duly registered in this Con-
sulate.
Portuguese Consulate in Tokyo, 4th November,
1948.
/s/ J. A. ABRANCHES PINTO.
702 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Rubber Stamp): Consulate of Portugal—Tokyo.
(Stamp): Portuguese Republic 25:00 (eseudos)
Consular Service.
/s/ THOMAS AINSWORTH,
American Vice Consul.
(Stamp): American Consular Service.
American Consular Service certificate attached.
[Endorsed]: Filed Sept. 2, 1949. U. S. D. C.
Defts. Ex. HH.
DEFENDANT’S EXHIBIT NO. 5
IN PINTO DEPOSITION
(Translation )
Consulate of Portugal
Tokyo
Affidavit
I, Joao do Amaral Abranches Pinto, Consul of
Portugal in Vokyor.....4.224.-55- + -5
Upon request and because it is the truth and to |
whom it may concern, do hereby certify that, the -
books and documents belonging to the files of the —
Consulate of Portugal in Yokohama having been
destroyed on the occasion of the earthquake and
subsequent fire of September 1, in the year 1923, it
is not possible to furnish the record of birth cer-
tificate of Filipe Jairus d’Aquino, married, born in |
Yokohama on March 26, 1921, son of Jose Filomeno |
d’Aquino and Maria d’Aquino............... 7 |
vs. Umted States of America 753
Consulate of Portugal in Tokyo, November 4, 1948.
_ The Consul,
/s/ J. A. ABRANCHES PINTO.
(Rubber Stamp): Consulate of Portugal—
Tokyo.
(Stamp): Portuguese Republic 25$00 Consular
Service.
(Rubber stamp): Paid at the rate of 11.00 the
amount of Y275.00 (Escudos 25800) in accordance
with item 26 of the table of rates, this amount being
entered in the book of entries under No. 207.
Tokyo, November 4, 1948.
jay Bb. PANTO.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
American Vice Consul.
(Stamp): American Consular Service.
Translator’s affidavit attached.
American Consular Service Certificate attached.
[Endorsed]: Filed Sept. 2, 1949. U.S.D.C. Defts.
Ex. IT.
DEFENDANT’S EXHIBIT NO. 6 IN PINTO
DEPOSITION
(Translation )
Consulate of Portugal
(Coat of Arms)
Tokyo
Service of the Portuguese Republic
Certificate of Consular Registry No. 159
The Consul of the Portuguese Republic in Tokyo
754 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
makes it known that Ikuko Toguri d’Aquino (by
marriage to Filipe J. d’Aquino) marital status, |
married, profession, newspaperwoman, daughter of ©
Jun Toguri and Fumi Toguri, born on July 4, 1918, :
a native of Los Angeles, California, is a Portuguese |
citizen and is duly registered in the Register of this |
Consulate under No. 5 of Book No. 1 of inscriptions.
Her last residence was in (blank) and she arrived
in (date blank) at this consular district. :
She resides in Setagaya-ku, Ikejirimachi, No. 396.
She proved her identity by previous consular cer- |
tificate. :
Consulate of Portugal in Tokyo, on September 10, |
1946. |
/s/ IKUKO TOGURI D’AQUINO, |
Signature of the person being :
registered.
/3/ J. A. ABRANCHES PINTO,
Consul.
(Rubber stamp): Consulate of Portugal—Tokyo.
(Photograph. )
Characteristics: Blank.
This certificate is valid for the period of one year. |
(Stamp): Portuguese Republic 12$00 Consular
Service.
Paid at the rate of 0.20 the amount of Y2.40 in |
accordance with Item No. 1 of the table of rates, |
vs. Umted States of America 7d0
this amount being entered in the book of entries
under No. 1694. Tokyo, September 10, 1946.
/s/ A. PINTO.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
American Vice Consul.
(Stamp): American Consular Service.
Translator’s affidavit attached.
American Consular Service certificate attached.
[Endorsed]: Filed Sept. 2, 1949. U.S.D.C. Defts.
ix. any.
DEFENDANT’S EXHIBIT NO. 8 IN PINTO
DEPOSITION
(Translation )
(Coat of Arms )
Consulate of Portugal
Tokyo
Service of the Portuguese Republic
Certificate of Consular Registry No. 190
The Consul of the Portuguese Republic in Tokyo
makes it known that Filipe Jairus d’Aquino, mari-
tal status, married, profession, newspaperman, son
of Jose Filomeno d’Aquino and Maria d’Aquino
born on the 26th day of March, 1921, a native of
Yokohama, is a Portuguese citizen and is duly
registered in the Register of this Consulate under
No. 5 of Book No. 1 of inscriptions, his last resi-
dence was Yokohama, and he arrived on (date in
blank) at this consular district.
756 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
He resides in Tokyo, Setagaya-ku, 396 Ikejiri-
machi.
He proved his identity by previous consular cer-
tificate. Consulate of Portugal in Tokyo, on June
30, 1947.
/s/ FILIPE J. D’AQUINO,
Signature of the person being —
registered.
/s/ J. A. ABRANCHES PINTO,
Consul.
(Photograph. )
(Rubber Stamp): Consulate of Portugal—Tokyo.
Characteristics: Blank:
This certificate is valid for the period of one year. |
(Stamp): Portuguese Republic 12$00 Consular
Service.
Paid at the rate of 0.80 the amount of Y9.60 in ©
accordance with Item 1 of the table of rates, this |
amount being entered in the book of entries under
No. 1753. Tokyo, June 30, 1947.
/s/ 2 BENTO.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
American Vice Consul.
American Consular Service certificate attached.
[Endorsed]: Filed Sept. 2, 1949. U.S.D.C. Defts.
Re Lib.
vs. United States of America 7157
GOVERNMENT’S EXHIBIT “T”’
IN PINTO DEPOSITION
Consulate of Portugal
Tokyo, April 28, 1949.
No. 21
mroc. 2,2
Memorandum
Reference is made to the Diplomatic Section’s
memorandum of January 27th, 1949, concerning the
nationality of Mrs. Iva Toguri de Aquino.
2. The Portuguese Diplomatic Agency wishes to
advise the Section that, regardless of.the fact that
Mrs. Aquino could eventually have acquired the
Portuguese citizenship by marriage (which in this
case 1s a doubtful point still under investigation),
she may not claim the Portuguese nationality while
living in a country whose laws might also consider
her as its national.
3. For further information, the Agency invites
the Section’s attention to the Portuguese Code of
Civil Law which in its article 18 § 3 includes the
above provision.
ney te POY.
[Stamped]: Consulate of Portugal.
Tokyo, April 28th, 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
American Vice Consul.
(Stamped): American Consular Service.
[Endorsed]: Filed Sept. 2, 1949. U.S.D.C. U.S.
mx. 71.
758 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
In the Southern Division of the United States
District Court for the Northern District of
California
No, Simi ik
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
VS.
IVA IKUKO TOGURI D’AQUINO,
Defendant.
DEPOSITION OF HEINRICH DUMOULIN
Deposition of Heinrich Dumoulin, taken before |
me, Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the ©
United States of America, in Mitsui Main Bank |
Building, Room 335, in Tokyo, Japan, under the
authority of a certain stipulation for taking oral
designations abroad, and upon order of the United
States District Court, made and entered March 22,
1949, in the Matter of the United States of America |
vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, pending in the
Southern Division of the United States District
Court, for the Northern District of California, and
at issue between the United States of Americ¢a vs. |
Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino.
The plaintiff appearing by Frank J. Hennessy,
United States District Attorney; Thomas DeWolfe,
Special Assistant to the Attorney General, and Noel
Storey, Special Assistant to the Attorney General,
——
and the defendant, appearing by Wayne N. Col- |
lins and Theodore Tamba.
vs. United States of America 759
The said interrogations and answers to the witness
thereto were taken stenographically by Mildred
Matz and were then transcribed by her under my
direction, and the said transcription being there-
after read over correctly to the said witness by me
and then signed by said witness in my presence.
It was orally stipulated between Mr. Tamba of
the defense, and Mr. Storey of the prosecution, that
the administering of the oath to the witness was
waived.
It is Stipulated that all objections of each of the
parties hereto, including the objections to the form
of the questions propounded to the witness and to
the relevancy, materiality and competency thereof,
and the defendant’s objections to the use of the
deposition, or any part of the deposition, by plain-
tiff, on the plaintiff’s case in chief, shall be re-
served to the time of trial in this cause.
HEINRICH DUMOULIN
of Tokyo, Japan, of lawful age, testified as follows:
Direct Examination
By Mr. Tamba:
Q. Father Dumoulin, what is your full name?
A. Heinrich Dumoulin.
Q. And, Father, do you belong to the Society
of Jesus? A. Yes, lama Jesuit.
Q. You are presently with the Sophia Uni-
versity in Tokyo?
A. Yes, staying at Sophia University as pro-
fessor.
760 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Heinrich Dumoulin. )
@. What subjects do you teach at Sophia Uni-
versity ?
A. Philosophy, and now religion.
Q. How long have you been with Sophia Uni- |
versity ?
A. I am staying at Sophia from the beginning
of my stay in Japan, that is to say from 1935, and
I belong to the staff of the University, but I don’t
remember that date.
Q. Father, you know a person by the name of Iva
Toguri, also known as Iva D’Aquino? [2*]
A. Yes, Toguri—Ikuko, I know her. A person
ealled [kuko Toguri.
Q. Did she come to see you sometime in the year
1945, Father Dumoulin?
A. Yes, she came to see me together with Philip
D’Aquino, asking me to—explaining to me their sit- —
uation, and their desire to be married in the Catholic
Church. Mr. D’Aquino had been a Catholic. He
was a Catholic, and so they wanted to be married
at the Catholic Church, and she wanted to become
a Catholic, to be instructed and baptized before.
J do not remember exactly what we taked about
together but I know I came to the conclusion that .
the best way to do would be to have her instructed
by a Father who could give the instruction in Eng-
lish. JI, myself, was replacing at the time Father
Heuvers, the parish priest of St. Theresa. He was |
the parish priest of the church and, as he was ill,
I was replacing him. As I, myself, did not know |
* Page numbering appearing at bottom of page of original
Reporter’s Transcript.
vs. United States of America 761
(Deposition of Heinrich Dumoulin. )
sufficient English I found that it would be better
that she would be instructed by a Father who could
give the instruction in English. I think she spoke
Japanese but as she spoke English better than
Japanese I came to the conclusion that it would be
easier to have her instructed in English. I do not
remember to what extent she was able to speak
Japanese. I called Father Kraus, who speaks Eng-
lish perfectly, and Father [Kraus gave the instruc-
tions and he was able to baptize her, if I am not
mistaken one or two days before the marriage.
(Witness consults paper purporting to be a bap-
tismal certificate.) Yes, baptized the 18th of April
and she was married on the 19th.
Q. Father, did you prepare the church for the
marriage ?
A. No, I don’t remember it. It must have been
the lay brother.
Q. Were you present at the marriage ceremony ?
A. I was present later on in the parlor. We
signed the documents and I saw the couple and IL
felicitated them. I remember that quite well that
I saw them and felicitated them after the marriage,
and [ may say this (witness consults photostatic
copy of purported marriage certificate), I may say,
is the signature of Father Kraus. It is very charac-
teristic of Father Kraus’ handwriting to anybody
who knew him.
Q. May I ask you where Father Kraus is today ?
A. He died in 1946, I think in March. The day
you can, of course, find out. |
762 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Heinrich Dumoulin.)
Q. What is this that you refer to as havin
Father Kraus’ signature?
A. That is written by Father Kraus.
Q. The certificate of marriage?
A. Yes, and this is the signature of Father |
Kraus. Quite characteristic and anyone who knew
him, I am sure, can tell his signature.
Mr. Tamba: May I offer this document in evi- |
dence. It is the certificate of marriage dated April
19, 1945, and I offer it in evidence as defendant’s
Exhibit ‘‘I.’’ It is a photostatic copy.
Mr. Storey: No objection.
Q. May I show you a photostatic copy of an-
—
other document (counsel hands document to wit- |
ness), and ask you what that is?
A. That was written by myself, and is the testi-
mony of baptism. I have written the whole docu-
ment.
Mr. Tamba: I offer the photostatic copy of
the baptismal certificate as defendant’s Exhibit ‘‘2,”
in evidence. It bears the date April 18, 1945.
Mr. Storey: No objection.
Q. Father, I show you another document (coun- —
sel hands paper to witness), and ask you what —
that is?
A. Yes. I think—it is just a copy of what I
have written.
Q. Is that a certificate of marriage?
A. It is the baptismal certificate. It should be
a copy. It is [4] the signature of Father Heuvers,
‘
us. United States of America 763
(Deposition of Heinrich Dumoulin. )
who was the parish priest of the church. I took his
place during his illness and now he is recovered.
Q. Is that your signature (Counsel points to
paper) ?
A. No, it is Just a copy. I think it is an exact
eopy of what I have written. As far as J can see
it is a copy of the photograph and that is what I
have written.
Q. On the other side of this page (counsel points
to the reverse side of the same document), may I
ask what is on there?
m= Yes. That is a copy, too.
Q. I am referring to defendant’s exhibit ‘‘1,”’
for the purpose of the record, is this language on
the back of this document I am showing you the
same as that?
A. There are two books in the parish. . One
book of baptismal records and one of matrimony
records and that is a photograph taken of the book
Dre baptismal records, Exhibit ‘‘2.’’ That is, the
photograph taken from the book of matrimony,
Exhibit ‘‘1,’’ which is the principal thing, and that
I wrote myself on the inside, and on the reverse we
make reference where the status of the person has
changed, confirmation and first communion and mar-
riage, and that is a copy.
Q. Do you remember who was present at the
marriage, that is if you recall?
A. JI remember. Father Kraus, and the couple,
and there were certainly two witnesses present that
764 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Heinrich Dumoulin. )
signed the document. Let me see (witness con-
sults paper). Yes, Mr. Pinto and Rita D’Aquino.
@. Their names are contained in Exhibit ‘‘1’’
of the record ?
A. Yes. Of course these two documents are of
the highest value, signed by these people and in this
case by myself and Father Kraus and the couple,
and these books are regarded of the highest value,
and we had to save these books in case of incen-
diary Loa
Q. Do you remember I came up to the university
and looked at the books with you and Father Van?
A. Yes.
Q. What is Father Van’s full name?
A. Van Overmeeren. I saw the Father first
bring the books to you.
Q. How long did this course of instruction con-
tinue, if you remember?
A. I cannot exactly remember. When she came
for the first time J don’t remember the exact date
of that but it must have been—I was replacing
Father Heuvers and you can make sure about the
sickness of Father Heuvers. I think he fell ill dur-
ing the month of January, about the second half of
January, and it must have been some time after
that.
@. Do you remember the day of the marriage,
that there was a big air raid in Tokyo?
A. Yes, there was an air raid in Tokyo, and we
had to take refuge and I remember that after com-
ine from the refuge we went to the parlor and
vs. United States of America 765
(Deposition of Heinrich Dumoulin.)
were quite pleased that the ceremony and all things
had taken place, that it was possible.
Q. After the marriage do you remember seeing
Mrs. D’Aquino again?
A. I don’t exactly. Maybe, but I have a faint
remembrance, but I don’t recall exactly.
Q. You have no recollection of her coming to
ehurch ?
A. I think she came, but I could not say with
certainty.
Q. Did she ever discuss the war with you, Father
Dumoulin ? A. Never.
Q. Did she ever discuss with you—well, did she
appear to be sincere in becoming a member of your
faith?
A. I had the impression that she wanted to be
a Catholic and, as I told you the other day when vou
eame to see us, I don’t remember exactly her con-
versation, but first I must explain that I must have
explained to Mr. D’Aquino and to Miss Toguri,
that they could [6] be married in the Catholic
Church without her being a Catholic; that it would
be easy to have permission. That is a thing I
always explain in such cases. It was my responsi-
bility to explain that so that I must have explained
that to the couple, and I remember that Father
Kraus was quite satisfied about the way things were
going on, but I don’t remember any conversation
with Father Kraus in exact terms, but matrimony
took place and everything was all right.
766 Iva Ikuko Togurit D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Heinrich Dumoulin. )
Cross-Examination
By Mr. Storey:
Q. Father Dumoulin, did Miss Toguri tell you
that she was an American citizen at the time that
she married Mr. D’Aquino?
A. I cannot remember that. J cannot remember
that.
/s/ H. DUMOULIN. [7]
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss.
I do solemnly swear that I will truly and im- :
partially take down in notes and faithfully tran-
scribe the testimony of Heinrich Dumoulin, a wit- |
ness now to be examined. So help me God.
/s/ MILDRED MATZ.
Subseribed and sworn to before me this twenty- —
ninth day of April, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the
United States of America.
[American Consular Service Seal.]
Service No. 668a; Tariff No. 38; No fee pre-
seribed.
vs. United States of America 767
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss.
CERTIFICATE
I, Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the
United States of America in and for Tokyo, Japan,
duly commissioned and qualified, acting under the
authority of a certain stipulation for taking oral
designations abroad, and upon order of the United
States District Court, made and entered March 22,
1949, in the Matter of United States of America,
Plaintiff, vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, Defend-
ant, pending in the Southern Division of the United
States District Court, for the Northern District of
California, and at issue between United States of
America vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino, do hereby
certify that in pursuance of the aforesaid stipula-
tion and court order and at the request of Theodore
Tamba, counsel for the defendant Iva Ikuko Toguri
D’Aquino, I examined Heinrich Dumoulin, at my
office in Room 335, Mitsui Main Bank Building,
Tokyo, Japan, on the twenty-eighth day of April,
A.D. 1949, and that the said witness being to me
personally known and known to me to be the same
person named and described in the interrogatories,
administering of the oath to the witness having
been waived by oral stipulation between Theodore
Tamba, counsel for the defendant, and Noel Storey,
counsel for the plaintiff, his evidence was taken
down and transcribed under my direction by Mil-
768 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
dred Matz, a stenographer, who was by me first
duly sworn truly and impartially to take down
in notes and faithfully transcribe the testimony of
the said witness Heinrich Dumoulin, and after hav-
ing been read over and corrected by him, was sub-
scribed by him in my presence; and I further
certify that I am not counsel or kin to any of the
parties to this cause or In any manner interested
in the result thereof.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand
and seal of office at Tokyo, Japan, this 16th day
of May, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the
United States of America.
[American Consular Service Seal.]
Service No. 897; Tariff No. 38; No fee prescribed.
vs. United States of America 769
In the Southern Division of the United States
District Court for the Northern District of
California
No. 31712 R
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
VS.
IVA IKUKO TOGURI D’AQUINO,
; Defendant.
DEPOSITION OF KATSUO OKADA
Deposition of Katsuo Okada, taken before me,
Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the United
States of America, in Mitsui Main Bank Building,
Room 335, in Tokyo, Japan, under the authority
of a certain stipulation for taking oral designations
abroad, and upon order of the United States Dis-
trict Court, made and entered March 22, 1949, in
the Matter of the United States of America vs.
Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, pending in the South-
ern Division of the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California, and at
issue between the United States of America vs. Iva
Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino.
Lhe plaintiff appearing by Frank J. Hennessy,
United States District Attorney; Thomas DeWolfe,
Special Assistant to the Attorney General, and Noel
Storey, Special Assistant to the Attorney General,
and the defendant, appearing by Wayne N. Collins
and Theodore Tamba.
770 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
It appearing that the witness Katsuo Okada could
not intelligently testify in the English language and
did well understand the Japanese language, one
Makoto Matsukata, who also well understand said
language, was employed as interpreter, and was
sworn in as follows:
‘You do solemnly swear that you know the Eng-
lish and Japanese languages and that you will truly
and impartially interpret the oath to be adminis-
tered and interrogatories to be asked of Katsuo
Okada, a witness now to be examined, out of the
English language into the Japanese language, and
that you will truly and impartially interpret the
answers of the said Katsuo Okada thereto out of
the Japanese language into the English language,
so help you God.’’
The said interrogations and answers to the wit-
ness thereto were taken stenographically by Mildred
Matz and were then transcribed by her under my
direction, and the said transcription being there-
after read over correctly to the said witness by me
and then signed by said witness In my presence.
It is Stipulated that all objections of each of the
parties hereto, including the objections to the form
of the questions propounded to the witness and to
the relevancy, materiality and competency thereof,
and the defendant’s objections to the use of the
deposition, or any part of the deposition, by plain-
tiff, on the plaintiff’s case in chief, shall be re-
served to the time of trial in this cause.
us. United States of America 771
KATSUO OKADA
of Tokyo, Japan, of lawful age, being by me duly
sworn, deposes and says:
Direct Examination
By Mr. Tamba:
Q. Mr. Okada, do you live in Japan?
em Yes.
@. Are you a citizen and national of Japan?
A. Yes.
My Were you a member of an organization known
s the Kempei Tai? [2*] A. Yes.
a. How many years were you in the Kempei
Tai? A. Five years.
Q. Did you have a rank in the Kempei Tai?
me Yes, I did.
Q. What was that rank?
A. Master Sergeant.
Q. Did the Tokyo Kempei Tai always wear uni-
forms ?
A. As for myself, most of the time I wore
ordinary civilian clothes, but on special occasions
I wore my uniform.
Q. Was that true of most members of your
organization ?
A. It depended on the section and it was di-
vided into those who wore uniforms and those that
certain days in the month wore uniforms and other
times wore ordinary civilian clothes.
Q. You were a friend of Iva D’Aquino?
*Page numbering appearing at bottom of page of original
Reporter’s Transcript.
7172 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Katsuo Okada.)
A. Yes.
Q. You were a friend of Philip D’Aquino?
A. Yes. ,
Q. And you are also a friend of Mrs. Kido and
Mr. Kido, the people with whom the D’Aquinos
lived, is that correct? A. No mistake.
Q. Now, you have talked with Mr. D’Aquino
about this case many times, have you not?
A. Is it concerning Iva?
@. Yes, concerning Iva.
A. While Iva was in Sugamo Prison I talked
with him many times. After Iva was taken to the
United States I met him six or seven times.
And you have met me three times?
Three times, including today.
When did you first meet Iva D’Aquino?
Approximately October, 1944. [3]
Are you sure you did not meet her in 1943?
I am not sure whether it was 1948 or 1944,
POP OP
but it was at the time Tojo quit the Prime Minister- —
ship.
Q. Into how many organizations was the Kempel
Tai divided?
A. Three sections that worked outside.
@. What were those sections?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent, |
irrelevant, immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Mr. Collins: The purpose of that, if it please —
the Court, was to show the sections and the divi- |
ft
vs. Umted States of America 7173
(Deposition of Katsuo Okada. )
sions of the sections and their respective functions,
of the sections, insofar as their activities were con-
eerned which directly related to checks upon the
defendant.
The Court: The Court has ruled.
(A. Thought Control, it was divided into two
sections; communistic activities, and activities con-
trary to communistic activities; besides that there
was a section called ‘‘foreign nationals section,’’
such as Niseis and foreigners.)
Q. What section did you belong to, Mr. Okada?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I was in the Thought Control Section, in
the part that was investigating rightists organiza-
tions, one that was not investigating communism.)
Q. Do you know whether or not members of
the Kempei Tai organizations were watching Mrs.
D’ Aquino ? A. Yes, I know.
Q. Do you know whether or not members of the
Metropolitan Police were watching Iva D’Aquino?
me 6Yes; I do.
Q. Do you know the names of the Kempei Tai
who were watching Iva D’Aquino?
A. There were two. I don’t know the name of
one, but I do know the last name of one, which is
Tanaka.
Q. What became of the records of the Kempei
Tai?
7174 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Katsuo Okada. )
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. The papers connected with our work were
burned on approximately the tenth of August, 1945,
when it was obvious that we had lost the war.)
@. Did you ever discuss the war with Iva
D’ Aquino ?
Do you mean during the war?
Yes, during the war?
Yes, I have. [4]
How many times?
So many times that I cannot possibly count. |
What did she say to you and what did you
say to her about the war? :
A. Fundamentally, the point that was brought —
out was that Iva did not know when the war would
be over but, finally, when the war was over Japan
would lose.
Q. What did you say to her when she told you
that information ?
A. As to who was going to win or lose the war
was up to the way the individual thought. ‘‘ You,
as a person who has had long residence in the ©
United States, you know the strength of the United
States well. So, it is probably correct that you
say America is going to win the war. I don’t want |
to think that Japan will lose the war. For you to |
talk about the fact that Japan is going to lose the
war is not good because you will be violating Jap- ©
OPoOorPop
vs. United States of America 179
(Deposition of Katsuo Okada.)
anese law and, therefore, I caution you that you
better not talk about this to outsiders. If you talk
about such things to people other than myself you
will be investigated by the Kempei gendarme and
the Metropolitan Police. I am also a Kempei, but
I am also your friend. J don’t want to accuse you
of a crime, but I am going to caution you of this
as a friend.’’
Q. Did you have authority to arrest Iva
D’Aquino, if you wished to do so?
m Yes, I did.
Q. In your acquaintanceship with Iva D’Aquino
did you consider her pro-American or pro-Japanese ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as calling for a
conclusion.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I thought she was pro-American. )
Q. Was Iva D’Aquino one of the Nisei watched
by the Kempei Tai, if you know?
A. Yes, she was.
Q. Did Iva D’Aquino ever participate in air
raid drills? [5]
A. JI have never seen her.
@. Did she ever tell you that air raid drills
were silly because Japan was going to lose the war,
or was losing the war?
A. She constantly said Japan would lose the
war, but she really had not much thought for air
Yaid drills, and she said air raid drills were things
for children to do.
776 Iva Ikuko Togurnt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Katsuo Okada.) :
Q. Was she ever called a spy in the neighbor- |
hood where she lived ? |
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as hearsay, not |
proper direct examination. |
The Court: Objection sustained. .
(A. The children used to call her ‘‘spy’’ after
she had passed. I have heard this, but that defini- -
tion of spy is in the broad sense, not in the narrow |
sense, meaning that anybody that did not help |
Japan’s effort was considered a spy. The first big |
air raid was the 10th of March, 1945. At that time
I was staying at Iva’s home. The people in the
neighborhood were all outside preparing water. Iva |
and Philip, looking in the distance where it was
burning, said in a loud voice: It’s burning, it’s |
burning,’ they said incendiary bombs drop and _
they said they were like fireworks, and were mak- |
ing a lot of noise. As far as incendiaries were
concerned, they would drop one from a plane and '
then they would all scatter just like fireworks.
At that time I heard people in the neighborhood
yelling or saying: ‘‘Spy,’’ to them.)
Q. Do you know what nationality Philip ©
D’Aquino has? ROP do:
@. What is his nationality ?
A. I heard that it was Portuguese.
Q. Do you know the nationality of Philip
D’Aquino’s father? A. I have heard it.
Q. What was his nationality?
A. The same. Portuguese, so I have heard.
4
us. Umted States of America rel
(Deposition of Katsuo Okada.)
Q. What became of Philip D’Aquino’s father
during the war, if you know?
A. I heard
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: Sustained.
(A. I heard that he was in Karuizawa during
the war with other foreigners.) [6]
Q. Was he forcefully taken from Tokyo or Yoko-
hama, do you know?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, sir.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. During the war all those foreign nationals
of opposing countries were forcefully evacuated to
Karuizawa or Hakone.) .
Q. Could a Nisei get into an alien internment
camp ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial; calling for a conclusion.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. They did not go as their number was large.)
Q. Do you remember an occasion when Mrs.
Kido broke up with her relatives on account of Iva
and Philip D’Aquino living with her?
Mir. BeWolfe: Just a moment, Mr. Tamba.
Object to that as incompetent, irrelevant and im-
material, hearsay, calling for a conclusion.
The Court: Sustained.
My. Collins: This goes to the question of whether
or not, if Your Honor please, there was any duress
778 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Katsuo Okada. )
in the neighborhood against the defendant which
compelled, or which caused the Kidos at least, to
think about ousting the defendant from their home.
The Court: Read the question. I don’t recall
that that was embodied in the question.
(Question read.)
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. The Kido home, in which Iva and Philip
were living was next to Kido’s brother’s home and
due to the fact that the neighbors did not say good |
things about the D’Aquinos living in the house they
separated their relationship, but people next door
(the brother’s family) had encouraged them to put
out Iva and Philip.)
Q. Was Iva living with Mrs. Kido before she
married D’Aquino?
——
A. She was living there before she was married. :
Q. Was she living there when you first met her?
A. The first time I met Iva was when she came
to visit the Kido’s at the time I was there. Shortly
after I met Mrs. Kido and she had said, ‘that oii
wants me to let her live here.”’
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained. *
Mr. DeWolfe: The balance of the answer is con-
versation between a Mrs. Kido and this witness.
Mr. Collins: It goes to the question of the duress,
exercised upon the defendant, if Your Honor please,
concerning a place to live.
vs. United States of America 779
(Deposition of Katsuo Okada.)
The Court: That doesn’t take it out of the
hearsay rule.
Mr. Collins: It is a question of advice given by
a Kempei tai who was an officer of the Japanese
government to the landlady where the defendant
resided.
The Court: The Court has ruled. Proceed. You
have a record.
(A. The first time I met Iva was when she came
to visit the Kidos at the time I was there. Shortly
after that I met Mrs. Kido and she said: ‘‘That
girl wants me to let her live there, but do you think
it is advisable?’’ I said: ‘‘During the war, to let
foreigners live in your house will hamper your
relations with the neighbors, but if you caution that
foreigner well, so she does not commit any mis-
takes, and you are cautious yourself, I think it will
be all right to let them live there.’’)
Q. Do you know whether or not Iva ever bought
war bonds? A. She never bought any.
@. Do you know whether or not the people of
Japan could change jobs during the war?
A. Do you mean Japanese people?
Q. Yes.
A. Japanese people could change their jobs.
Q. How about foreigners?
A. It was free for foreigners to change their
jobs, but depending on their jobs. [7]
@. Was it easy for people who were foreigners
to get jobs in Japan during the war?
780 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Katsuo Okada. )
A. Even if they were good in Japanese it was
very hard.
Q. But Iva D’Aquino spoke very good Japanese?
A. She could speak well enough not to hamper
her daily living.
Q. Was it good Japanese?
A. If an ordinary person heard it they could
determine right away that she was a foreigner.
Q. Were you able to tell foreigners when you
heard them speak Japanese?
A. When I first met her I could decide.
Q. Did you ever see a post card from the radio
station, Tokyo, ordering Iva D’Aquino to return to
her work? A. Yes.
Mr. DeWolfe: Just a moment, Mr. Tamba. I~
ask that answer go out and object to the question
on the ground that it calls for something not the
best evidence.
The Court: Read the question, Mr. Reporter.
(Question read.)
Mr. Collins: This does not ask for the content.
The Court: The objection will be sustained. Let
the answer go out.
@. Were ordinary people permed to talk with
prisoners of war?
A. Not ordinary townspeople.
Q. Do you know whether or not Iva D’Aquino
|
bought food through the black market for prisoners |
of war?
A. Yes, I know, but Iva did not buy the food
a — —
us. Umted States of America 781
(Deposition of Katsuo Okada. )
directly herself. She had Mrs. Kido buy it for her.
Q. Did Iva D’Aquino ever tell you what kind of
work she was doing at the radio station ?
A. lLasked her once.
Q. What did she tell you?
A. She said that ‘‘four or five days out of the
week I broadcast a script that was written by
prisoners of war or other people in Radio Tokyo.
The people that write that script are American
prisoners of war, and Australian soldiers, and Fili-
pino soldiers. Those people write it, and I broad-
cast in the evenings ten to fifteen minutes.’’
Q. Did Iva D’Aquino ever tell you that she dis-
cussed the war with [8] prisoners of war ?
A. Yes.
Q. What did she tell you about it?
A. ‘*The American, Australian and Filipino
soldiers cannot hear news about the war.’’ The news
that she heard from other people she would write
on a little memo and when she went to Radio Tokyo
she would put it under something and give it to
them. The prisoners were very appreciative of this.
Q. Do you know whether or not Iva D’Aquino
had access to short wave news broadcasts from the
United States?
A. I think she could listen to it at the broad-
casting station. At that time you could not listen
to it in town.
Q. Did she tell you that she had heard short
wave broadcasts? A. Yes, she did.
782 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Katsuo Okada.)
@. Did she tell you that she got information
from her husband who was working for Domei?
A. Philip worked for Domei and there were
people that were listening to the short wave broad-
easts in Radio Tokyo. Those people contributed to
her information.
Cross-Examination
By Mr. Storey:
Q. Mr. Okada, do you recall that you had a dis-
cussion with me immediately prior to this deposi-
tion? A. Yes, I do.
Q. Do you recall that during that discussion you
told me that you first met Mrs. D’Aquino in Oc-
tober, 1944?
A. Yes, I do remember, but as to the date I
don’t remember whether it was the eighteenth year
of Showa, which is 1943, or the nineteenth year of
Showa, which is 1944. I know it is the year that
Tojo quit.
Q. Mr. Okada, how long have you known Mrs.
Kido?
A. JI am not sure of the year but I think it is
1942 or 1943. *
@. When did Iva move to the home of Mrs.
Kido? [9]
A. JI think it is the time when Tojo quit.
OO —————
Q. How far was your home from the home of |
Mrs. Kido?
A. In the Japanese way of counting, two and
one-half RI to three RI.
a ES ge
vs. United States of America 783
(Deposition of Katsuo Okada. )
Q. How often were you in the home of Mrs.
Kido ?
A. At the most once a week, and when I was
busy, about once every two weeks.
Where was Mr. Kido at this time?
He was at war in Manchuria.
When you first met Iva, was she married?
Do you mean with Philip ?
Yes.
No, she had not married Philip.
Was Philip hving there with Iva from the
time when you first met her ?
A. When I first met her she was just coming
there alone, and then—I am quite sure, but shortly
after that Philip came there.
@. Approximately what date did Philip come
there ?
A. The first time I was introduced to Philip was
about one month after I was first introduced to Iva.
Q. Was he living there at the time?
A. He had a house in Atsugi and his baggage
was in Atsugi, and he would commute to the Tokyo
Domei from Atsugi, and there were times when he
would stay at Mrs. Kido, and times when he would
go directly home to Atsugi. Iva was in Atsugi be-
fore she came to Kido’s place.
@. Myr. Okada, do you consider yourself a very
close friend to the D’Aquino’s?
A. As the time that I was associated with them
was such as it was I think we were close friends,
but I do not know how they felt.
a ae a ie me
784 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Katsuo Okada.)
Q. Mr. Okada, you have testified that you knew
that the Kempei Tai was watching Miss Toguri, did
the Kempei watch all foreign [10] nationals who
were registered in Japan?
A. The Kempei kept surveillance over all neu-
trals and enemy country nationals.
Q. Did the Kempei also keep certain Japanese
nationals under surveillance ? A. Yes.
Q. Did Iva know that you were a member of
the Kempei when you first met her and during your
later associations with her ?
A. Yes, she did.
Q. And during this time Iva was still very
friendly with you? A. Yes.
Q. Mr. Okada, you have testified that you were
told
Mr. DeWolfe: I am not going to offer the next
question because it is related to hearsay matter that
went out on direct examination.
The Court: Very well.
Mr. DeWolfe: The next appears at line 17.
(Q. Mr. Okada, you have testified that you were
told Philip D’Aquino’s father was evacuted to a
recreational town, Karuizawa?
A. After the war, when D’Aquino’s father came
back to Atsuki J talked with him.)
Q. What other foreign nationals were evacuated’
to this area?
A. I don’t know in detail, but I know that the
foreigners were transferred—evacuated to Karui-
a
= ——
us. United States of America 785
(Deposition of Katsuo Okada. )
zawa and Hakone, with the exception of those who
were necessary to Japan.
Q. Were these foreign nationals evacuated to
this area because they were considered dangerous
to the internal security of Japan?
A. That, and one more thing, that they did not
want any injuries to be brought on foreign na-
tionals by the Japanese.
Q. Then the Niseis were not considered danger-
ous to Japan—the ones who were working in
Tokyo ?
A. That was not my responsibility to determine
that and, therefore, I do not know, but as the num-
bers of Niseis, Manchurians and Chinese were great
I do not think that they had the facilities to take
them away.
Q. Could any Japanese national quit any job at
any time he desired during the war?
A. As far as principle was concerned, they were
free. Any healthy [11] people which were not work-
ing, according to a law, Choyorei, were forcefully
made to work in factories necessary to the war
effort. Those people were the same as soldiers and
unless they were taken sick, they were not allowed
to quit.
Q. If a Japanese national working in one of
these war factories were to be absent from his plant
would he receive a post card instructing him to come
back to work when he was physically able to work ?
A. ‘There were times when they were ealled out
786 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Katsuo Okada.)
by post card or the factory personnel would come
and take him off to the factory, and it was also a
crime for those who said they were sick if they were
not sick, or ran away.
Q. You have testified that Iva bought food which
she gave to the prisoners of war. What were these
prisoners of war doing in Japan at that time?
A. In the case of Iva, most of them were work-
ing in the broadcasting station.
@. They were working for the Japanese Govern-
ment at the broadcasting station ?
A. Yes, they were forcefully made to work there.
@. What were they doing, were they broad-
casting ?
A. Ihave never seen them but according to Iva’s
story they would write script or broadcast.
Q. Mr. Okada, were you ever physically present
when Mrs. D’Aquino was questioned by the Kem-
pei? I mean when the Kempei was talking to Miss
Toguri personally ?
A. I have never seen her talking directly to the
Kempei Tai but I have seen her talk to the police.
Redirect Examination
By Mr. Tamba:
Q. Mr. Okada, the Kido family comes from the
town where you were born and reared ? |
A. Yes, where Mr. Kido came from. [12]
Q. And you have been a friend of Mr. Kido’s
for many years, I assume. A. Yes.
us. Umted States of America 787
(Deposition of Katsuo Okada.)
Q. Mr. Okada will you tell us how the Kempei
Tai investigated or worked on a case?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to incompetent, irrele-
vant and immaterial.
Mr. Collins: ‘The matter was developed on cross-
examination.
Mr. DeWolfe: I don’t think it was gone into on
cross-examination.
The Court: What have you in mind?
Mr. Collins: Well, as I say, it has a relation
with the balance of it. It is a question of how the
Kempei tai lists people and the type of surveillance
to which they subject them, depending upon their
classification as to whether they were foreign na-
tionals or Japanese nationals. It is a matter within
the personal knowledge of this Kempei tai master
sergeant.
The Court: In the interest of time I will
allow it.
A. Do you mean in regards to foreign nationals,
or somebody else?
Q. In regards to foreign nationals, or any case
that was being investigated.
Mr. DeWolfe: Just a moment. Object to it as
incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection will have to be sustained.
(A. Cases are started by people. That is why
you investigate the person first. Do you just mean
the Kempei T'ai or the police too?)
Q. Well, the Kempei Tai.
788 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Katsuo Okada. )
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection and then there is
an answer about a page long about investigational
procedure.
The Court: These matters have no relation to
this case.
Mr. Collins: If your Honor please, you see the
question was split, but it comes to a question of the
duties of Kempei tai in so far as foreign national
are concerned and the interference to which they
subjected foreign nationals, depending upon the
type what type they put them into; that is, either
they divided them into rightists or leftists.
The Court: Well, I don’t know where I got this
thought, but it seems to me that running through
the record it appears that their duty was that of
a policeman in comparison with our own. Somebody
suggested that. Am IJ in error in that question?
Mr. Collins: It is little more than that. From
the deposition of this very officer of the Kempei
tai. Because they were the thought control police.
The Court: Read the question, Mr. Reporter.
(Question read.)
Mr. De Wolfe: And then there is a long answer
that has no bearing on the facts or the defendant
in this case. It is very general.
Mr. Collins: She falls in the classification as
being subjected to the interference of the Kempei
tai as a foreign national and this answer relates
directly to that, stating too, that every foreign na-
us. United States of America 789
(Deposition of Katsuo Okada. )
tional and one other type, have always two police-
men together with two Kempei tai attached.
The Court: It did not matter whether it was
two or four. The objection will be sustained.
(A. In the Kempei Tai there are books listing
foreign nationals, communists, rightists, and many
other such books, and among many Kempei Tail
they decide who is responsible for what. The Kem-
pei Tai has the responsibility for foreign nationals
or communists. They will first investigate their resi-
dence and then will question the neighbors as to the
necessary things. That is carried on during several
times, and from among those they would pick out
those who they think are suspicious. They will sur-
vey those which they consider especially suspicious
from what the neighbors say, and if they are a
foreigner and acting in a way of a spy they will
arrest them. If the communist is also conducting
underground activities they will arrest him, and on
one foreigner they will always have one Kempei
Tai from the headquarters and one from the sec-
tion ‘There are also two from the police. In the
ease that the foreigner or the communist moves the
Kempei will send their card to the Kempei detach-
ment in that area and the police will send their card
to the area to which the person has moved, and so
to every foreigner and communist there are always
two policemen and two Kempei attached.) [13]
790 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss.
I do solemnly swear that I will truly and impar-
tially take down in notes and faithfully transcribe
the testimony of Katsuo Okada, a witness now to
be examined. So help me, God.
/s/ MILDRED MATZ.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 26th day
of April, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the United
States of America.
[ American Consular Service Seal. ]
Service No. 632a; Tariff No. 38; No Fee pre-
seribed.
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss.
CERTIFICATE
I, Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the
United States of America in and for Tokyo, Japan,
duly commissioned and qualified, acting under the
authority of a certain stipulation for taking oral
designations abroad, and upon order of the United
States District Court, made and entered March 22,
1949, in the matter of United States of America,
Plaintiff, vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, Defend-
ant, pending in the Southern Division of the United
— =
vs. Umted States of America 791
States District Court, for the Northern District of
California, and at issue between United States of
America vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, do hereby
eertify that in pursuance of the aforesaid stipula-
tion and court order and at the request of Theodore
Tamba, counsel for the defendant Iva Ikuko Toguri
D’Aquino I examined Katsuo Okada, at my office
in Room 335, Mitsui Main Bank Bulding, Tokyo,
Japan, on the twenty-sixth day fo April, A.D. 1949,
using as interpreter Makoto Masukata, who was by
me first duly sworn truly and impartially to inter-
pret the oath to be administered and interrogatories
to be asked of the witness out of the English into
the Japanese language, and truly and impartially
to interpret the answers of the witness thereto out
of the Japanese language into the English language; _
and that the said witness being to me personally
known and known to me to be the same person
named and described in the interrogatories, being
by me first sworn to testify the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth in answer to the
several interrogatories and cross-interrogatories in
the cause in which the aforesaid stipulation, court
order, and request for deposition issued, his evi-
dence was taken down and transcribed under my
direction by Mildred Matz, a stenographer who was
by me first duly sworn truly and impartially to
take down in notes and faithfully transcribe the
testimony of the said witness Katsuo Okada, and
after having been read over and corrected by him,
was subscribed by him in my presence; and I fur-
792 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
ther certify that I am not counsel or kin to any
of the parties to this cause or In any manner inter-
ested in the result thereof.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand
and seal of office at Tokyo, Japan, this 12th day of
May, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Counsul of the United
States of America.
[ American Consular Service Seal. ]
Service No. 861; Tariff No. 38; No fee pre-
scribed.
[May 17, 1949.]
vs. Umted States of America 793
In the Southern Division of the United States
District Court for the Northern District of
California
No. 31712 R
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
VS.
IVA IKUKO TOGURI D’AQUINO,
Defendant.
' DEPOSITION OF
KAZUYA MATSUMIYA
Deposition of Kazuya Matsumiya, taken before
me, Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the
United States of America, in Mitsui Main Bank
Building, Room 335, in Tokyo, Japan, under the
authority of a certain stipulation for taking oral
designations abroad, and upon order of the United
States District Court, made and entered March 22,
1949, in the Matter of the United States of Amer-
ica vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, pending in the
Southern Division of the United States District
Court, for the Northern District of California, and
at issue between the United States of America vs.
Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino.
The plaintiff appearing by Frank J. Hennessy,
United States District Attorney; Thomas DeWolfe,
Special Assistant to the Attorney General, and Noel
Storey, Special Assistant to the Attorney General,
794 Iva [kuko Toguri D’ Aquino
and the defendant, appearing by Wayne N. Collins
and Theodore ‘l'amba.
The said interrogations and answers to the wit-
ness thereto were taken stenographically by Mildred
Matz .and were then transcribed by her under my
direction, and the said transcription being there-
after read over correctly to the said witness by
me and then signed by said witness in my presence.
It Is Stipulated that all objections of each of the
parties hereto, including the objections to the form
of the questions propounded to the witness and to
the relevancy, materiality and competency thereof,
and the defendant’s objections to the use of the
deposition, or any part of the deposition, by plain-
tiff, on the plaintiff’s case in chief, shall be reserved
to the time of trial in this cause.
KAZUYA MATSUMIYA
of Tokyo, Japan, of lawful age, and employed by
CI&E Section, SCAP, being by me duly sworn, de- —
poses and says:
Direct Examination
By Mr. Tamba:
Q. What is your full name, sir?
A. Kazuya Matsumiya.
Q. And what is your present business and oc- -
cupation ?
A. JI am working as an adviser in the CI&H, |
None valine
Q. And vou were born in Japan? A. Yeu
4
us. Umted States of America 795
(Deposition of Kazuya Matsumiya. )
Q. You have had some edueation in the United
States, have you, sir? An “Yoest
Q. And what schools did you attend in the
United States?
A. I attended Earlham University, Richmond,
Indiana.
Q. Do you hold a degree from that school ?
A. Yes.
Q. Was that a Quaker school? A. Yes.
@. Did you attend any other schools in the
United States?
A. After graduating from Earlham I attended
for one year at Columbia University and did grad-
uate work there. [2*]
Q. Did you attend other schools there besides
those two you mentioned ?
A. After that I studied at Hartford Seminary,
from where I got a MA Degree.
Q. Have you taught in any American university ?
im Yes.
Q. In what university have you taught?
A. University of California, Berkeley.
Q. How long did you teach there ?
A. One year.
Q. Do you know a person by the name of Iva
Toguri, also known as D’Aquino? A, Yes,
@. And when and where did you first meet this
person, sir? A. I met her in Tokyo.
Q. Under what circumstances?
*Page numbering appearing at bottom of page of original
Reporter’s Transcript.
796 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Kazuya Matsumiya.)
A. She came to my father’s school which is
called the School of Japanese Language and
Culture.
Q. When was that? Do you remember the year
and date?
A. I don’t remember the date and year exactly
but before the war, probably 740.
@. Did she attend your school? Was she en-
rolled in your school ? A. Yes, she did.
(). And for how long a period of time was she
in your school?
A. About a year and a half—she was a little less _
than a year and a half.
@. She registered there in September, 1941?
A. Before the war?
Q. Yes. A. I believe it was that.
Q. In any event she registered at your school
before the war ? A. Yes. [3]
Q. Was your school destroyed in the air raids?
A. Yes.
Q. And the records of the school were de-
stroyed ? A. Yes.
|
Q. And your school was a school which catered —
to adult classes, to people who were either mission- —
aries or in the diplomatic service, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know whether or not Iva Toguri had
a good knowledge of the Japanese language ?
A. In my impression she was a rather poor stu-
dent in Janguage.
‘
us. United States of America 797
(Deposition of Kazuya Matsumiya. )
Q. In other words, she did not know Japanese
very well? A. Very little.
@. And she did not have much aptitude for ac-
quiring a knowledge of the language ?
A. The main reason for that was she had not
attended a Japanese school in America. Ordinarily
Niseis who came to Japan had previously had train-
ing in Japanese schools in California—or in Amer-
ica, but she did not have much training in Japanese
in America.
Q. Now, do you know what her financial condi-
tion was at the time she attended your school ?
A. Well, she was in a rather financially difficult
situation.
Q. Did you or your family do anything to assist
her financially ? Ber wWeés, did:
Q. What did you do, sir?
A. Well, firstly at that time I was writing a
book on Japanese grammar, in English, so that I
used her for typing the manuscript, and secondly,
my wife also gave her some work teaching piano
lessons to my children and our friends’ children.
Q. And that was done in order to assist her to
pay her tuition, is that correct? [4] A. Wes
©. Can you tell us what her attitude was
towards the Japanese people generally, if you
know.
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as calling for a
conclusion.
798 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Kazuya Matsumiya. )
(A. Generally speaking she was rather critical
about the Japanese. )
Q. Do you know what the Kempei T’ai organiza-
tion was, Mr. Matsumiya? A. Yes.
@. What was that, sir?
A. Well—organization of the Kempei Tai?
@. Yes, in other words, they were the secret
police, were they not?
A. Yes, they had that section of Kempei Tai.
Q. Did they ever check your school with refer-
ence to Iva Toguri?
A. Not specificaliy Miss Toguri, but my students
in general.
Q. How often did they check your school?
A. They came about twice a week.
Q. Did any other Japanese organization check —
your school with reference to Iva Toguri or any —
of your other students? A. The police.
Q. That would be the Metropolitan police?
A. Yes, Atago Police Station.
Q. How often did they check your school with
reference to the students or Miss Toguri?
A. About once a week, or so.
Q. Did any of these calls by the Kempei Tai
or the local police disturb your school program?
A. Well, they did not disturb the actual work
but certainly they disturbed me. I was executive
secretary.
Q. Did Miss Toguri have occasion to relate to
vou her experiences in the United States?
vs. Umted States of America 799
(Deposition of Kazuya Matsumiya. )
A. Yes, she did.
Q. With reference to what?
A. Well, she was telling me about her family,
and particularly [5] that she was working through
her college by assisting her father. [For instance,
driving the trucks from the farm to the city. l
gathered she was very independent in a sense.
Q. From what you know of Miss Togurn and
her association with you while she was attending
your school, can you tell us whether she was pro-
American or pro-Japanese ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as calling for a
conclusion, incompetent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. In my judgment she was rather pro-
American.
Q. Ineidentally, do you specialize in any par-
ticular type of work?
A. Well, I am in measurement work.
@. Have you ever done any work in social
psychology ? A. Yes.
Q. You have had experience in that field of en-
deavor ? A. Yes.
Q. Were you familiar with the conditions that
existed in Japan during the war with reference to
the Nisei people here?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as calling for a con-
clusion, too general.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. During the war all Niseis were in a very
800 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Kazuya Matsumiya. )
difficult position. Generally speaking you can divide
them up in two groups. One is rather pro-Japanese
and the other is pro-American, and, of course, the
pro-American group was in a more difficult position
than the other.)
@. Do you have any knowledge of Miss Toguri
going to the American consulate in Yokohama in an
attempt to return to the United States ?
A «Wes:
@. What information do you have on the
subject?
A. She told me she was trying to go back to
America but she could not succeed.
Q. Did she give you any reason for her inability
to successfully return to America ? A. No.
®. Incidentally, you left Tokyo at some later
date because you were suspected of being pro-
American yourself, is that right ?
Mr. DeWolfe: I object to that as Incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial. .
The Court: Objection sustained.
Mr. Collins: And then cross-examination. [6]
BCA, “Wess)
Cross-Examination
By Mr. Storey:
@. Mr. Matsumiya, when is the last time you |
saw Miss Togur1? |
A. Ihave not seen her since she left the school. |
|
Q. And give us your best recollection when Miss ©
Toguri entered your school.
{
vs. United States of America 801
(Deposition of Kazuya Matsumiya. )
It was before the war.
Was it 1936, 19377
I think it was about 740, I think.
What is your best recollection ?
1940, about that time, I think.
How long did she remain in your school?
About a year and a half.
After she left your school you never saw her
any more? A. No.
@. You never talked to her any more?
A. No.
Q. Would you be able to recognize Miss Toguri?
If I showed vou a group photograph would you
be able to recognize Miss Toguri among the other
Japanese persons?
A. What do you mean——
Q. If I showed you several pictures of Japanese
would you be able to recognize her
A. Yes, I can recognize her.
Q. Did Miss Toguri ever indicate to you in a
conversation whom she wanted to win the war?
A. I don’t remember exactly.
Q. When did you leave Tokyo, Mr. Matsumiya?
A. Well, it was March ’44. I evacuated my fam-
ily to Karuizawa.
Q. During the time you knew Miss Toguri, did
you ever loan her any personal property to help
her out ? A. Please, again. [7]
OPrOrorop
(Question repeated by stenographer. )
A. Yes.
802 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Kazuya Matsumiya. )
@. What did you lend her ?
A. When she moved to a smaller room near the
school she borrowed a zabuton—a cushion.
Q. Did Miss Toguri ever return that cushion ?
A. No.
Redirect Examination
By Mr. Tiamba:
Q. Did Miss Toguri attend your school during
the war?
A. Yes, part of the time, I think. [8]
Japan,
City of Tokyo, .
American Consular Service—ss.
I do solemnly swear that I will truly and impar- —
tially take down in notes and faithfully transcribe
the testimony of Kazuya Matsumiya, a witness now |
to be examined. So help me, God.
/s/ MILDRED MATZ.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this twenty- —
fifth day of April, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the United
States of America.
[ American Consular Service Seal]
Service No. 617a; Tariff No. 38; No fee pre-
scribed.
vs. Umted States of America 803
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss.
May 7, 1949.
CERTIFICATE
I, Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the
United States of America in and for Tokyo, Japan,
duly commissioned and qualified, acting under the
authority of a certain stipulation for taking oral
designations abroad, and upon order of the United
States District Court, made and entered March
22, 1949, in the Matter of United States of America,
Plaintiff, vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, Defend-
ant, pending in the Southern Division of the United
States District Court, for the Northern District of
California, and at issue between United States of
America vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, do hereby
certify that in pursuance of the aforesaid stipula-
tion and court order and at the request of Theodore
Tamba, counsel for the defendant Iva Ikuko Toguri
D’Aquino I examined Kazuya Matsumiya, at my
office in Room 335, Mitsui Main Bank Building,
Tokyo, Japan, on the twenty-fifth day of April,
A.D. 1949, and that the said witness being to me
personally known and known to me to be the same
person named and described in the interrogatories,
being by me first sworn to testify the truth, the
whole truth, and nothing but the truth in answer
to the several interrogatories and cross-interroga-
tories in the cause in which the aforesaid stipula-
804 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
tion, court order, and request for deposition issued,
his evidence was taken down and transcribed under
my direction by Mildred Matz, a stenographer who
was by me first duly sworn truly and impartially
to take down in notes and faithfully transcribe the
testimony of the said witness Kazuya Matsumiya,
and after having been read over and corrected by
him, was subscribed by him in my presence; and
I further certify that I am not counsel or kin to
any of the parties to this cause or in any manner
interested in the result thereof.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand
and seal of office at Tokyo, Japan, this seventh day
of May, A.D. 1949.
/3s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the United
States of America.
[American Consular Service Seal]
Service No. 828; Tariff No. 38; No fee prescribed.
[Endorsed]: Filed May 13, 1949.
‘
vs. Umted States of America 805
In the Southern Division of the United States Dis
trict Court for the Northern District of Cali-
fornia.
Neo. 81712 R
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff.
VS.
IVA IKUKO TOGURI D’AQUINO,
Defendant.
DEPOSITION OF
LARS PEDERSEN TILLITSE
Deposition of Lars Pedersen Tillitse, taken before
me, Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the
United States of America, in Mitsui Main Bank
Building, Room 335, in Tokyo, Japan, under the
authority of a certain stipulation for taking oral
designations abroad, and upon order of the United
States District Court, made and entered March 22,
1949, in the Matter of the United States of America
vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, pending in the
southern Division of the United States District
Court, for the Northern District of California, and
at issue between the United States of America vs.
Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino.
The plaintiff, appearing by Frank J. Hennessy,
United States District Attorney; Thomas DeWolfe,
Special Assistant to the Attorney General ; and Noel
Storey, Special Assistant to the Attorney General;
806 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
and the defendant, appearing by Wayne N. Collins
and Theodore Tamba.
The said interrogatories and answers of the wit-
ness thereto were taken stenographically by Irene
Cullington and were then transcribed by her under
my direction, and the said transcription being there-
after read over correctly to the said witness by me
and then signed by said witness in my presence.
It was orally stipulated between Mr. Tamba of the
defense, and Mr. Storey of the prosecution, that the
administering of the oath to the witness was waived.
It is stipulated that all objections of each of the
parties hereto, including the objections to the form
of the questions propounded to the witness and to
the relevancy, materiality and competency thereof,
and the defendant’s objections to the use of the dep-
osition, or any part of the deposition, by plaintiff,
on the plaintiff’s case in chief, shall be reserved to
the time of trial in this cause.
The witness stated that he had heretofore fur-
nished a written statement and that his Government
had given him permission to testify in accordance
with the contents of that written statement.
Direct Examination )
By Mr. ‘T'amba:
Q. Mr. Tillitse, you are the Minister from Den-'
mark to Japan, is that right?
A. Yes, I was at that time; now I am the{
diplomatic representative.
vs. Umted States of America 807
(Deposition of Lars Pedersen Tillitse. )
Q. Mr. Minister, do you know Miss Iva Ikuko
Toguri? A. Yes, I know her.
Q. She was employed by the Royal Danish Lega-
tion in Tokyo, Mr. Minister?
A. Yes, she was employed as a stenographer-
typist from the beginning of January, 1944, until
the Legation was closed in May, 1945, following
rupture of diplomatic relations between Denmark
and Japan.
Q. She was married in the spring of 1945, is
that correct? [2*]
A. She was married in the spring of 1945 to a
Portuguese subject, Mr. Philip D’Aquino.
Q. Then her name changed?
A. Yes, to Mrs. D’Aquino.
@. What were her working hours at the Lega-
tion, Mr. Minister?
A. She worked daily at the Legation from 9 a.m.
to 4 p.m. on week days, except Saturday, when the
office closed at 12 Noon.
Q. Mr. Minister, what was her monthly salary?
A. The salary was in yen 100 from January,
1944, to June, 1944, and then yen 160 from July,
1944, to May, 1945. In January she received one
month’s extra salary, at New Years time, as is the
custom in Japan.
Q. Mr. Minister, she worked for your office for
approximately 18 months? A. That is correct.
Q. Did you become quite well acquainted with
her during that time, Mr. Minister?
*Page numbering appearing at bottom of page of original
Reporter’s Transcript.
808 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Lars Pedersen Tillitse. )
A. Yes, quite well acquainted.
Q. Was she introduced to your family?
A. Yes; in the summer of 1944 she spent her
vacation in our bungalow at Karuizawa.
Q. Mr. Minister, you had certain conversations
with Miss Toguri, is that correct?
A. Yes, we talked about many things; also about
the war.
@. What impression did you get of Miss Toguri?
A. I got the impression that she was more like
an American than like a Japanese, because she had
been educated in America.
Q. Did she have difficulty, if you know, adjusting
herself to the Japanese way of life?
A. She often told me about the great difficulty
she had in the beginning in adapting herself to the
Japanese way of life. [3]
Q. Did she ever tell you that she regretted not
being allowed to return to the United States, Mr.
Minister? | :
A. Yes, she did that repeatedly. She wanted —
to return to the United States in the autumn of 1941, ©
and she was very sorry that she was stranded in |
Japan during war time. |
Q. Did she discuss the war with you during the
period of your acquaintanceship ? |
A. Yes, we often discussed the war, and I re- —
member distinctly that she said that, of course, |
America would win the war and that it was mad- —
ness on the part of Japan to try and attack the
vs. Umted States of America 809
(Deposition of Lars Pedersen Tillitse. )
United States, and I always took it for granted
that she wanted America to win the war.
Q. Mr. Minister, do you know whether or not
she was interrogated by the Japanese police about
her work at the Legation?
A. Yes, when she started working for the Danish
Legation, she was interrogated by the Japanese
police about her work at the Legation, and I have
no doubt that she was questioned many times during
the period she worked for us.
Q. Did she tell you that, Mr. Minister?
A. I cannot recall it, but it was common knowl-
edge at that time that the police took special inter-
est in all persons who worked for foreigners
Q. You never knew, Mr. Minister, that she
worked as a broadcaster at Radio Tokyo?
A. No, I never knew that; she never told me
she had such employment.
Q. Did she often tell you news that she had
heard ?
A. Yes, she would tell me news she had heard
from broadcasting people, but I knew she had many
friends and I found it quite natural that she was
Well acquainted with those subjects.
Q. Did you know what her husband’s occupation
was, Mr. Minister?
A. I thought he was with broadcasting station,
but I am not quite [4] sure.
Q. Did you know the nationality of her husband ?
™ I think he was half Portuguese and half
810 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Lars Pedersen Tillitse. ) :
Japanese. By citizenship he was Portuguese and
he had a Portuguese passport.
@. You did not learn of Mrs. D’Aquino’s trouble
until some time in 1945, is that correct, Mr.
Minister ?
A. Not until autumn of 1945 when I was back
in Denmark. I think it was in ‘‘Newsweek’’ or
‘‘Time’’ that she had been arrested by the occupation
authorities in Japan, under suspicion of treason
in connection with her radio work.
Q. Was this a surprise to you, Mr. Minister?
A. I was greatly surprised. I was also worried
because I knew she was fond of America and be-
cause I had never heard of her connection with
Radio Tokyo.
®. That is all.
Cross-Examination
By Mr. Storey:
Q. Mr. Minister, when did you first meet Mrs.
D’ Aquino?
A. When she came to apply for a position in
my Legation.
Q. That was in January, 1944?
A. Either in December, 1943, or January, 1944.
Q. During the period of time that Miss Toguri
worked for you, was she absent for any prolonged
period of time?
A. No, she was very regular
Q. Were you ever present when she was ques-
tioned by the police? A. Never.
{
us. Umted States of America 811
(Deposition of Lars Pedersen Tillitse. )
Q. All you know concerning her interrogation
by the police was what she told you herself?
A. Yes. It was so customary at that time that
anybody who had anything to do with foreigners
would be questioned. All of my Japanese servants
were questioned, too.
Q. During the entire time that Miss Toguri
worked for you she concealed the fact that she was a
member and doing broadcasting [5] work at Radio
Tokyo?
A. She never told me about it.
©. ‘That is all.
/s/ L. TILLITSE.
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss.
I do solemnly swear that I will truly and im-
partially take down in notes and faithfully trans-
eribe the testimony of Lars Pedersen Tillitse, a
witness now to be examined. So help me God.
/s/ IRENE CULLINGTON.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 17th day
of May, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the
United States of America.
[American Consular Service Seal]
Service No. 904a; Tariff No. 38; No fee prescribed.
812 Iva [kuko Toguri D’ Aquino
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss.
CERTIFICATE
J, Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the
United States of America in and for Tokyo, Japan,
duly commissioned and qualified, acting under the
authority of a certain stipulation for taking oral
designations abroad, and upon order of the United
States District Court, made and entered March 22,
1949, in the Matter of United States of America,
plaintiff, vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, Defend-
ant, pending in the Southern Division of the United
States District Court, for the Northern District of
California, and at issue between United States of
America vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, do hereby
certify that in pursuance of the aforesaid stipulation
and court order and at the request of Theodore
Tamba, counsel for the defendant Iva Ikuko Toguri
D’Aquino, I examined Lars Pedersen Tuillitse, at
my office in Room 335, Mitsui Main Bank Building,
Tokyo, Japan, on the seventeenth day of May, A.D.
1949, and that the said witness being to me person-
ally known and known to me to be the same person
named and described in the interrogatories, being
the accredited Diplomatic Representative of the
Kingdom of Denmark to the Supreme Commander
for the Allied Powers, declared that he had received
the permission of his Government to waive his diplo-
matic immunity to give testimony in this cause; and
fd
ani =
us. United States of America 813
!
that administering of the oath to the witness being
waived by oral stipulation between Noel Storey, ap-
pearing for the plaintiff, and Theodore ‘Tamba,
appearing for the defendant, his evidence was taken
down and transcribed under my direction by Irene
Cullington, a stenographer who was by me first duly
sworn truly and impartially to take down in notes
and faithfully transcribe the testimony of the said
witness Lars Pedersen Tillitse, and after having
been read over by him and he having declared that
the transcription was correct without alteration was
subscribed by him in my presence; and I further
certify that I am not counsel or kin to any of the
parties to this cause or in any manner interested
in the result thereof.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand
and seal of office at Tokyo, Japan, this twenty-first
day of May, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the
United States of America.
[American Consular Service Seal]
Service No. 957; Tariff No. 38; No fee prescribed.
[Endorsed]: Filed May 26, 1949.
814 Iva I[kuko Toguri D’ Aquino
In the Southern Division of the United States Dis-
trict Court for the Northern District of Cali-
fornia.
No. 31712 R
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff.
VS.
IVA IKUKO TOGURI D’AQUINO,
Defendant.
DEPOSITION OF Kk. W. AMANO
Deposition of K. W. Amano, taken before me,
Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice-Consul of the United
States of America, in Mitsui Main Bank Building,
Room 335, in Tokyo, Japan, under the authority
of a certain stipulation for taking oral designations
abroad, and upon order of the United States Dis-
trict Court, made and entered March 22, 1949, in the
Matter of the United States of America vs. Iva
Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, pending in the Southern
Division of the United States District Court, for
the Northern District of California, and at issue
between the United States of America vs. Iva I[kuko
Toguri D’Aquino.
The plaintiff appearing by Frank J. Hennessy,
United States District Attorney; Thomas DeWolfe,
Special Assistant to the Attorney General; and Noel
Storey, Special Assistant to the Attorney General;
and the defendant, appearing by Wayne N. Collims
and Theodore Tamba.
The said interrogations and answers to the witness
{
:
|
a
a a a —
vs. United States of America 815
thereto were taken stenographically by Mildred
Matz and were then transcribed by her under my
direction, and the said transcription being thereafter
read over correctly to the said witness by me and
then signed by said witness in my presence.
It is Stipulated that all objections of each of the
parties hereto, including the objections to the form
of the questions propounded to the witness and to
the relevancy, materiality and competency thereof,
and the defendant’s objection to the use of the
deposition, or any part of the deposition, by plain-
tiff, on the plaintiff’s case in chief, shall be reserved
to the time of trial in this cause.
K. W. AMANO
of Tokyo, Japan, physician and surgeon, of lawful
age, being by me duly sworn, deposes and says:
Direct Examination
By Mr. Tamba:
Q. Dr. Amano, you were born in Japan, is that
correct ? ie © Whe:
Q. And your profession is that of physician and
surgeon ? A. Yes.
@. Where did you get your medical training?
A. In Japan and in the States.
@. What schools did you attend in the United
States, if any?
A. University of Pennsylvania
Q. How long were you at the University of
Pennsylvania ?
816 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of K. W. Amano.)
A. From 1929 to 1932. I got a Degree of Doctor
of Science in Medicine there.
@. Have you practiced medicine in the United
States? A. Yes.
@. And where, sir?
A. In Seattle from °’25, 1925 to 1929, and Los
Angeles, ’32 to 34.
@. Are you a member of any medical society
in the United States?
A. I was a member of the American Medical
Association and the American Academy of Ophthal-
mology and Otolaryngology. [2*]
Q. In the language of the layman, you were a
specialist of eyes, throat, nose and ear ailments?
A. Yes.
@. And that is what those terms mean, isn’t that
so, Doctor? A. Yes.
(). Have you been a member of any state medical
societies in the United States? |
A. Yes, in the state of Washington.
Q@. Are you a member of the California State
Medical Society, or were you a member?
A. Let me see, I did practice two years, it’s so
long since I came back, and after doing research at ©
the University of Pennsylvania, I dropped the con-
nection with the state medical society, I had not ,
joined, I think, but I did have a connection with |
the College of Medical Evangelists teaching.
Q@. Were you connected with any schools?
* Page numbering appearing at bottom of page of original
Reporter’s Transcript.
us. United States of America 817
(Deposition of K. W. Amano. )
A. At the College of Medical Evangelists as in-
structor, and University of Southern California
Medical School.
-Q. Doctor, since you won’t be in the states as a
witness in this case, I want to ask you some other
questions. You are a personal friend, and have been
physician to Ambassador Grew, isn’t that so?
A. Yes.
Q. You and your wife have treated him and
his wife? A. Yes.
Q. And you are the doctor he mentioned in his
book ?
A. Yes, my wife’s name is mentioned as she gave
the typhoid injection.
Q. And your wife is also a physician and sur-
geon ? ah. Ves.
@. And she was educated in the United States,
although born in Japan? [3]
A. Yes, born in Japan.
Q. And you have traveled extensively and studied
in other foreign countries ? A. Yes,
Q. What other foreign countries ?
A. France, Italy, Germany and Austria, and
England, J mean, excuse me.
@. And in your discussion with me prior to
coming here to the Diplomatic Section, you took the
position that you were neither pro-Japanese, nor
pro-American, but an internationalist.
A. Of course, my education is in both America
and as a Japanese race, what should I say, I am
818 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of K. W. Amano.)
Japanese in some way and in some way I am
American, too, but as a medical scientist I am an
internationalist.
@. Doctor, prior to the war and during the war
you treated the foreign nationals in Japan, is that
correct ?
A. Yes, the last fifteen years from 1934 we had
a connection with all foreign diplomats, missionaries
and business men.
Q. And how many different classes of foreign
nationals did you treat, can you tell us approxi-
mately ?
A. American, British, Belgian and I think about
twenty-five other foreign missions, embassies and
legations, and practically all countries.
@. Do you know a person by the name of Iva
Toguri also known as Iva D’ Aquino.
A. Yes, I knew her since she came here, to
Japan, I understand——
Q. And when did you first treat her medically?
A. Right after she arrived to Japan. That was —
around, I cannot recall the date but in 1941, I think.
@. What kind of treatment did you administer
then? A. Typhoid injections.
Q. After the war did you treat Mrs. D’Aquino
again professionally? [4]
A. You mean during the war. After the war
broke out? .
@. Yes. A. Yes.
Q. What was her ailment?
A. She had sinus infection, connected with the
us. United States of America 819
(Deposition of K. W. Amano.)
ear, otitis media, and sinus and beri-beri, connected
with malnutrition.
Q. Now, during the course of treatment, did you
have occasion to become quite well acquainted with
the defendant ? A. Yes.
Q. Did you have occasion to discuss the war
with her? mm Wes:
Q. Or the progress of the war with her from
time to time? A. Yes.
Q. Was that several times, doctor?
A. Yes, I think so. That was around the time
of the battle for the Philippines, or a sea battle,
which year I cannot recall.
Q. In your meetings with her and discussion of
the war did you form an opinion or conclusion as
to her allegiance to the United States of America?
A. Yes, that is definite.
Q. What was her allegiance, was she pro-
American or pro-Japanese ?
A. Her attitude was entirely definitely American.
Q. Can you recall anything in those discussions
to indicate that she was definitely American ?
A. Because whatever she is, American or Japa-
nese, one is not supposed to tell anything against
or about Japanese defeat.
Q. Did she mention that the Japanese would be
defeated ? A. Yes.
Q. Doctor, what became of the records of your
treatment of her and other foreign nationals during
the war? What did you do with those records?
820 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of K. W. Amano.)
A. Before I evacuated from Tokyo I discarded
them because the [5] Kempei-tai might use it
against them, my patients, and also for myself.
Q. In other words, those records were all de-
stroyed 2 A. Yes.
Q. Did either you or your wife have occasion
to treat the defendant and her husband after the
war ? A. Yes.
®. What treatment was administered to them?
A. 1947, after she came out of prison she came
for—Mr. D’Aquino came for ear and nose treat-
ment and Mrs. D’Aquino came for pregnancy check
by my wife.
Q. That was after she got out of Sugamo Prison?
A. Yes and we treated her until her nine months
of pregnancy.
Q. You say you evacuated from Tokyo, where
did you go? A. To Karuizawa.
Q. Was that the place where foreign nationals —
were interned ? A. Yes.
Q. And you treated foreign nationals there?
A. Yes.
|
Q. Were you checked by the Kempei-tai there?
A. We were always checked and once I was
ordered to come down to Tokyo, but I refused, and
they came to Karuizawa to quiz for two days.
Q. In your discussions with Mrs. D’Aquino you
knew that she had access to foreign or allied news
broadcasts, didn’t you, Doctor? A. Yes.
Q. ‘She told you that? A. Yes.
{
{
vs. Umted States of America 821
(Deposition of K. W. Amano.)
Q. And at one time in the summer of 1944 you
left her in charge of your home?
A. Of the clinic, yes, to stay.
@. How long did she stay there? [6]
A. I forgot, but just one summer season or prob-
ably between two or three months. That was in
1943, two or three, I cannot recall that.
Q. Doctor, did you have any knowledge of her
having trouble, financially ?
A. Yes, that is how she got the job in the broad-
casting station, she told me.
Q. She was having financial difficulties ?
A. Because her money was cut off, her commu-
nication from her father.
@. Did she ever tell you she hated Japan and
wished she had been back in America?
A. I cannot recall whether she mentioned that
but she was not so happy here, I am sure, because
she had the difficulty of life here.
Cross-Examination
By Mr. Storey:
@. Doctor, were you ever an American citizen?
A. Me?
m Yes.
A. As you know, Japanese not allowed to na-
turalize—Japanese cannot naturalize, that is why
I came back with a return permit. I entered the
eountry before 1924 so I could stay there forever.
So as an alien I could stay, but I came to Japan.
822 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of K. W. Amano.)
I was invited by the university so I came with a
return permit. Still I hold that.
Q. Doctor, when did you leave Tokyo and your
elinic?
A. IL think March, 1948. The year the war broke
out, and in ’42 I treated all the Americans, that
was June, when the Americans left. In 1944 after
Italy surrendered, in February the Ambassador’s
wife came and stayed until summer. Toguri stayed
before that year, I think. No, after that Toguri
stayed.
@. How often did you return to Tokyo after
you moved from Tokyo? A. Oh, once a week.
Q. Did you stay long in Tokyo when you came?
A. Just two or three days. I had to see the pa-
tients, and later I could come only once a month to
see if the house was standing or burned.
Q. Did you see Mrs. D’Aquino there often dur-
ing the time you returned to Tokyo, after you left?
A. One summer she stayed, and I think that year ©
I treated her, but i don’t know how often I saw |
her but I think not less than twenty times I think |
during the war. I saw her in Karuizawa. She came |
for the shots or for the certificates. Yes, for the |
vitamin shots she came to Karuizawa.
Q. What year was that? |
A. We staved two years. When she was there I
cannot remember, but during the war. |
Q. How far is Karuizawa from Tokyo?
A. About four hours ride on the train. .
vs. Umted States of America 823
(Deposition of K. W. Amano.)
Q. Was it true that people had to have per-
mission during those days to travel?
A. For the foreign nationals only, but Japanese
could go without permit.
Q. How often did Miss Toguri come to Karui-
zawa?
A. I think she dropped in two or three times.
She said she was staying at Mrs. Tillitse, the Danish
Minister’s house. I think she was working there at
that time. She was working there at the same time
she was working at the broadcasting station. I
don’t know exactly about her job. Yes, she men-
tioned that she was working there.
Q. Doctor, give us your best recollection as to
the number of times Mrs. D’Aquino discussed the
war with you during the war. Was it once or twice,
or two or three times ?
A. She came up with a Filipino prisoner of war,
Mr. Reyes, as a patient. Of course a couple of times
only, so we discussed it [8] not only on that occasion
but whenever she came we discussed, maybe three or
four times.
Q. And you gained the idea that she was pro-
American from these discussions you had with her?
During those three or four discussions ?
ma. Yes. .
- Re-Direct Examination
by Mr. Tamba:
Q. Do you know if Tillitse’s wife had a summer
home in Karuizawa ? A. Yes.
824 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of K. W. Amano.)
Q. Doctor, you say she was at Mr. Tillitse’s home
in Karuizawa when she called on you?
De, @ Meg
@. You mentioned this Italian woman you took
into your home. Why did you take her into your
home ?
A. She had a great difficulty and discomfort in
living in the Italian camp.
@. How long did you keep her there?
A. February to—about six months.
Q. Were you interviewed by the Kempei-tai be- ©
cause you had her in your home?
A. Not for that because she still—a Metropolitan
Police Board official arranged with the regular po-
liceman for the benefit of her because she was a
nervous wreck and she needed treatment and we
took her in our place but finally the head of the
Metropolitan Police Board came and took her back
to the camp against her will.
Re-Cross-Examination
By Mr. Storey:
Q. You have mentioned an internment camp at
Karuizawa
A. No, I mean internment camp at Denenchofu
for the Italians but there was no internment camp
in Karuizawa. Karuizawa was an open place for
the German refugees, from the East Indies, and [9]
half of the Soviet Embassy people evacuated from
here and was allowed to stay at Hotel Mampei, not
internment, and they went back to, I think they
vs. United States of America 825
(Deposition of K. W. Amano.)
went to Hakone when the war broke out, but in the
beginning they moved to Karuizawa. We delivered
a few Soviet babies.
Q. Was there an internment camp where these
people were gathered and put into some camp and
were guarded?
A. Yes. Italians, because since Mussolini’s gov-
ernment dropped these people of the Embassy was
taken, except those four Bodolio—some commercial
attache was investigated afterwards but all taken
first to the camp.
/s/ K. W. AMANO.
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss.
I do solemnly swear that I will truly and impar-
tially take down in notes and faithfully transcribe
the testimony of K. W. Amano, a witness now to be
examined. So help me God.
/s/ MILDRED MATZ.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 2nd day
of May, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the
United States of America.
[American Consular Service Seal. ]
Service No. 7338a; Tariff No. 38; No fee pre-
scribed.
826 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss.
CERTIFICATE
I, Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the
United States of America in and for Tokyo, Japan,
duly commissioned and qualified, acting under the
authority of a certain stipulation for taking oral
designations abroad, and upon order of the United
States District Court, made and entered March 22,
1949, in the Matter of United States of America,
Plaintiff, vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, Defend-
ant, pending in the Southern Division of the United
States District Court, for the Northern District of
California, and at issue between United States of
America vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, do hereby
certify that in pursuance of the aforesaid stipula- —
tion and court order and at the request of Theodore
Tamba, counsel for the defendant Iva Ikuko Toguri :
D’Aquino I examined K. W. Amano, at my office
in Room 335, Mitsui Main Bank Building, Tokyo,
Japan, on the second day of May, A.D. 1949, and
that the said witness being to me personally known
|
and known to me to be the same person named and |
described in the interrogatories, being by me first
sworn to testify the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth in answer to the several inter-
rogatories and cross-interrogatories in the cause in |
which the aforesaid stipulation, court order, and
!
4
|
’
{
vs. United States of America 827
request for deposition issued, his evidence was taken
down and transcribed under my direction by Mil-
dred Matz, a stenographer who was by me first duly
sworn truly and impartially to take down in notes
and faithfully transcribe the testimony of the said
witness K. W. Amano, and after having been read
over and corrected by him, was subscribed by him
in my presence; and I further certify that I am not
eounsel or kin to any of the parties to this cause
or in any manner interested in the result thereof.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand
and seal of office at Tokyo, Japan, this 19th day of
May, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the
United States of America.
[American Consular Service Seal. |
Service No. 933; Tariff No. 38; No fee prescribed.
828 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
In the Southern Division of the United States
District Court for the Northern District of
California.
No. 2672
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
VS.
IVA IKUKO TOGURI D’AQUINO,
Defendant.
DEPOSITION OF UNAMI KIDO
Deposition of Unami Kido, taken before me, —
Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the United ©
States of America, in Mitsui Main Bank Build- —
ing, Room 335, in Tokyo, Japan, under the au- :
thority of a certain stipulation for taking oral —
designations abroad, and upon order of the United |
States District Court, made and entered March 22,
1949, in the Matter of the United States of Amer-
ica vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, pending in the
Southern Division of the United States District
Court, for the Northern District of California, and
at issue between the United States of America vs. |
Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino. |
The plaintiff appearing by Frank J. Hennessy, |
United States District Attorney; Thomas DeWolfe, —
Special Assistant to the Attorney General, and
Noel Storey, Special Assistant to the Attorney Gen- |
eral, and the defendant, appearing by Wayne N. —
Collins and Theodore Tamba.
_ » — — =
vs. United States of America 829
It appearing that the witness Unami Kido could
not intelligently testify in the English language
and did well understand the Japanese language,
one Nobuo Nishimori, who also well understands
said language, was employed as interpreter, and
was sworn in as follows:
“You do solemnly swear that you know the Eng-
lish and Japanese languages and that you will
truly and impartially interpret the oath to be ad-
ministered and interrogatories to be asked of Unami
Kido, a witness now to be examined, out of the
English language into the Japanese language, and
that you will truly and impartially interpret the
answers of the said Unami Kido thereto out of
the Japanese language into the English language,
so help you God.”’
The said interrogatories and answers of the wit-
ness thereto were taken stenographically by Irene
Cullington and were then transcribed by her under
my direction, and the said transcription being
thereafter read over correctly to the said witness
by me and then signed by said witness in my pres-
ence.
It is stipulated that all objections of each of the
parties hereto, including the objections to the form
of the questions propounded to the witness and to
the relevancy, materiality and competency thereof,
and the defendant’s objections to the use of the
deposition, or any part of the deposition, by plain-
iff, on the plaintiff’s case in chief, shall be re-
Served to the time of trial in this cause.
830 Iva I[kuko Toguri D’ Aquino
UNAMI KIDO
of Tokyo, Japan, of lawful age, being by me duly
sworn, deposes and says:
Direct Examination
By Mr. Tamba:
Mrs. Kido, what is your occupation?
Housewife. |
Mrs. Kido, what is your husband’s name?
Mitsuyoshi Kido.
Where was he during the war? [2*]
He was in Manchuria.
Do you know a man by the name of Katsuo
ada’ A. Yes, I do.
How long have you known him?
About seven, eight or probably ten years.
Is he a friend of your husband?
They hail from the same place.
Do you know a woman by the name of Iva
itn D’Aquino? A. Yes.
Q. When did you first meet her?
A. I first met her on October 25, 1944, and she |
has been living at my place since the 27th of that :
month. :
Q. Was that the first time you met her? a
A. Yes. |
Q. Did she come to see you about getting a room |
at your house?
A. She came back from America with a niece
of a ‘‘go-between’’ whom I know. My husband |
©
haere 44) 4.
* Page numbering appearing at bottom of page of original /
Reporter’s Transcript. |
vs. United States of America 831
(Deposition of Unami Kido.)
was away in Manchuria and my children were
sent to the country, so this ‘‘go between” asked
me to rent a room for them.
Q. This man was the ‘‘go between”’ for you and
your husband ? im ‘West
Q. Is it the custom among Japanese to ask the
advice of a ‘‘go between’’ with respect to anything
they do?
A. Yes, in my ease I consulted the ‘*go between”’
because my husband had requested it.
Q. Did your ‘‘go between’’ tell you to take Iva
in as a roomer?
A. The ‘“‘go between’’ told me I ought to be
lonesome and that I had a large house, so how
about taking her in.
Q. Did you discuss the question of Mrs.
D’Aquino moving in with Mr. Okada?
A. Regarding taking these people in my house,
I told Mr. Okada that we were reprimanded for
even sympathizing with prisoners [3] of war, and
Mr. Okada, being a kempei, I asked him whether
it would be feasible to accommodate these persons.
Q. What did Mr. Okada tell you?
A. Mr. Okada said that she, being a woman,
wouldn’t do anything particularly bad, so I would
be able to keep her.
@. When you refer to ‘‘she being a woman”’
you mean Iva? ee Wes.
Q. Did Okado tell you he would do anything
to protect you?
A. What do you mean by “protect you’’?
832 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Unami Kido.)
Q. Did he tell you that he would come around
your place often so no suspicion would be had?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay and in-
competent, Your Honor.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. He said that she is an American citizen,
in other words a Nisei, so I will come around here
once in a while.)
Q. Did Mr. Okada come around your home once
in a while when Iva was living there?
A. He came around about once a week, and de-
pending upon his duty, he came around once in
two weeks.
Q. Do you remember, Mrs. Kido, when the
Kempei came to your home and Okada was there?
A. Yes.
Q. What did Okada say to the Kempei-tai?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as hearsay, incom-
petent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. I heard it later from Mr. Okada that he
said to the Kempei-tai, ‘‘She is a relative of mine,
so leave that to me.’’)
Q. Did you see Okada talk to the Kempei-tai —
at that time? A. No, I did not see.
Q. Do you remember the Kempei-tai coming ©
around and making inquiry about your husband?
A. Yes, they came around but I was absent, so
they inquired of my niece.
{
Q. Your niece told you about it? A, Yeu
|
|
vs. United States of America 833
(Deposition of Unami Kido.)
Q. Did you talk to Iva D’Aquino about that
afterwards? [4]
A. I didn’t know this Kempei came to inquire
about Iva. I thought he came to inquire about my
husband.
Q. Did Iva tell you that the Kempei-tai were
not inquiring about your husband but were in-
quiring about her?
A. Yes. I told Iva that I was worried about
something my husband had done in Manchuria,
and at that time she told me that the Kempei-tai
were inquiring about her, Iva.
@. Did the police come to your home and ask
about Iva?
A. They just asked whether or not Iva was
home?
@. How often did the police come there?
A. About two or three times a month.
Q. Did you ever see Iva talk with Mr. Okada?
m. Yes.
Q. And that was in your home? A. Yes.
Q. Philip D’Aquino came to live in your home
later, is that right? A. Yes.
@. And he and Iva were married ?
A. Yes; they lived together after they were
married.
Q. Did you have any trouble with your relatives
next door because you gave Iva a room?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
Irrelevant and immaterial.
The Court: Objection sustained.
834 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Unami Kido.)
(A. Yes.) .
@. What did your relatives say to you about
Iva?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as hearsay and in-
competent.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. You mean because she stayed in my room?)
Q. Did they say anything about Iva being pro-
American ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Same objection, Judge.
The Court: Same ruling.
(A. Yes.)
(). Did they tell you you should not have her
there ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as immaterial and
hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. They didn’t think it advisable to have such
people in my home.)
(. Your relatives don’t talk to you, even today,
is that correct, Mrs. ISido, over Iva?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
irrelevant and immaterial, hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. That’s correct.) [5]
Q@. Why did you take Iva into your home?
A. As I said before, my ‘‘go between’’ had
made the request. _
Q. Did you tell me, Mrs. Kido, before coming
here about an hour ago, that the reason you
wanted Iva there was because you wanted to help
vs. United States of America 835
(Deposition of Unami Kido.)
a foreigner in a strange land, because your husband
was away from home?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
(A. Yes, my husband was on foreign soil and
I understood her position.)
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as incompetent,
hearsay.
The Court: Objection sustained.
Q. Did you ever hear the neighbors call Iva
a spy?
A. When there were air raids there was con-
fusion and for that reason I heard that people
Said such things, but I did not hear 1 directly.
Q. Did you hear anybody call Iva a spy be-
eause she had a Christmas tree at one time?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as calling for a
conclusion, hearsay, incompetent, sir.
The Court: The objection will be sustained.
eo. Yes.)
Q. Do you know what kind of work Iva was
doing during the time of the war?
A. I knew that she was going to the broadcast
station, but I did not know what kind of work she
Was doing.
Q. Do you remember Iva remaining away from
the broadcasting station?
A. Yes, I remember.
Q. Do you remember Iva receiving a card from
the broadcasting station ?
836 Iva Ikuko Togurni D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Unami Kido.)
A. Yes, I read it to her.
Q. What did the card say, if you remember?
A. It just said to come to work.
Q. Did she go to work?
A. I ean’t recall clearly, but I think she did
not go out immediately, but I think she went out
two or three days later.
Q. Do you remember a man coming to your
home from the [6] broadcasting station?
A. She did not go after receiving a letter, so
a person came.
@. Did he order her to return to work?
A. I do not know because he met Iva.
Q. Did you know the man’s name?
A. I remember it was a man, but I don’t know
the name.
Q. Do you remember Iva remaining away from
the broadcasting station? A. Yes.
Q. For how long a period did she remain away
from the broadeasting station?
A. She was absent most of the time from April.
Q@. What year? A. 1945.
Q. Did Iva ever discuss the war with you?
A. It was not exactly a discussion, but she said
there was no chance of Japan winning the war.
Q. Did you buy things on the black market dur-
ing the war? Ce Wes iid.
Q. For yourself and Iva?
A. Yes; at first I bought for myself and for
Iva. Later Iva was taking 1t out. She once told
us. Umted States of America 837
(Deposition of Unami Kido.)
me that it was secret and not to reveal to anyone
because I would get in trouble as well as she. And
I asked her what was the matter and she said she
was taking it to sick prisoners of war.
Q@. When she left your home on these occasions,
did she leave with a bag?
A. Yes, she always carried a bag.
Q@. And was that full?
A. ‘There might have been some cosmetic kit in
it, also.
Q. Do you know if Iva ever bought war bonds?
A. No, she did not buy them. [7]
@. Did she ever collect metal ware, old clothes
or cotton to help the war effort?
A. She never did.
Cross-Examination
By Mr. Storey:
Q@. Mrs. Kido, were you ever present when Iva
was questioned by the Kempei?
A. At home you mean?
@. At any place? A. allio.
@. Mrs. Kido, were you ever present when Iva
was questioned by the police?
A. ‘The police authority came two or three times
a month, but when they did talk, I don’t know
what they talked about.
Q. Mrs. Kido, were you ever present in your
home when the police talked to or questioned Miss
D’ Aquino?
838 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Unami Kido.)
A. I was in the house, but I do not know what
they talked about.
Q. Did the Kempei ever question you about
Mrs. D’Aquino while she lived at your house?
A. The Kempei-tai did not talk to me directly
but they did talk to Mr. Okada and Okada told
them that “‘this is the home of one of my relatives,
so let me handle this matter.’’ Then after that
the Kempei did not come to my home.
Q. Did Mrs. D’Aquino know that Mr. Okada
was a member of the Kempei-tai?
A. I told her.
@. Was Mrs. D’Aquino friendly with Mr.
Okada?
A. He was my relative and we all talked to him.
Q. Were Mrs. D’Aquino and Mr. Okada
friends?
A. I introduced them and I do not know
whether you would call that friends or not.
@. Did Mrs. D’Aquino have any conversations
with Mr. Okada?
A. They never talked when they were [8] alone.
@. Did Mr. Okada know that you and Iva were
buying food on the black market?
A. Everybody was buying on the black market
and we talked of those things openly.
Q. So, Mr. Okada knew that you were buying
food for Iva on the black market? A. Yes
Q. Was this food that you bought on the black
market expensive?
\
us. United States of America 839
(Deposition of Unami Kido.)
A. Not necessarily too high, but it wasn’t the
official price.
Q. Did the food you bought on the black market
cost more than the food you bought on your food
ration coupons ? A. Yes.
Q. Did Mrs. D’Aquino furnish you with any of
this money to buy food on the black market?
me Ves.
Q. Did you ever see Mrs. D’Aquino deliver any
food to prisoners of war?
A. No, I did not see her deliver food to the
prisoners of war, but I have seen her carrying
foods.
Q. Mrs. Kido, you have testified that Mrs.
D’Aquino received a card from the radio station
directing her to return to work?
A. Yes, when she was away.
_Q. Was this card requesting Miss Toguri to
return to work or directing her to return to work?
A. You will return to work (Shutto Seyo).
Q. Who signed this card, Mrs. Kido?
A. It was written by the American Section.
Q. Did Mrs. D’Aquino report to work immedi-
ately after receiving this order?
A. No, she did not go immediately.
Q. Who was the man who came to your house
after receiving this card? [9]
A. I forgot the name, but a man did come.
@. Who did he talk to?
A. First he asked me if Iva was home. Then
he talked to her.
840 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Unami Kido.)
@. Did he talk to Mrs. D’Aquino?
A. I called Iva downstairs but I don’t know
what they talked about.
@. Was this man from the radio station?
A. Yes, I think he was from the American Sec-
tion.
Q. Did the man tell you he was from the Amer-
ican Section of the radio station?
A. He said he was from the broadcasting sta-
tion.
Q. Did he tell you what he wanted to talk to
you about?
A. He just asked me whether or not Iva was in.
Q@. Were you present when the man from the
radio station talked to Mr. and Mrs. D’Aquino?
A. I was present when he met Iva, but do not
know what they talked about. I do not know
whether Philip was there or not.
Q. That is all.
Re-Direct Examination
By Mr. Tamba:
Q. Was this man a fat man, if you remember,
Mrs. Kido?
A. He wasn’t very tall; I would say rather that
he was a small fellow.
Q. Was he a thin man?
A. Yes, he was a thin person; he wasn’t fat.
Q. Did he have curly hair or straight hair, if —
you remember ? | |
us. United States of America 841
(Deposition of Unami Kido.)
A. I did not observe that close; I just remem-
ber that he was a man and small in stature.
. Mrs. Kido, was Iva at home when the police
used to call two or three times a month?
A. She met them about twice and the rest of
the time I talked to the police.
Q. In other words, the rest of the time Iva
wasn’t home? A. Yes.
Q. That is all. [10]
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss.
I do solemnly swear that I will truly and im-
partially take down in notes and faithfully tran-
scribe the testimony of Unami Kido, a witness now
to be examined. So help me God.
/8/ IRENE CULLINGTON.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 13th day
of May, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the
United States of America.
[American Consular Service Seal.]
Service No. 874a; Tariff No. 38; No fee pre-
scribed. —
842 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss.
CERTIFICATE
I, Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the
United States of America in and for Tokyo, Japan,
duly commissioned and qualified, acting under the
authority of a certain stipulation for taking oral
designations abroad, and upon order of the United
States District Court, made and entered March 22,
1949, in the Matter of United States of America,
Plaintiff, vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, Defend-
ant, pending in the Southern Division of the United
States District Court, for the Northern District of
California, and at issue between United States of
America vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, do hereby
certify that in pursuance of the aforesaid stipula-
tion and court order and at the request of Theodore
Tamba, counsel for the defendant Iva Ikuko Toguri
D’Aquino, I examined Unami Kido, at my office in
Room 335, Mitsui Main Bank Building, Tokyo,
Japan, on the thirteenth day of May, A.D. 1949, |
using as interpreter Nobuo Nishimori, who was by —
me first duly sworn truly and impartially to inter-
pret the oath to be administered and interrogatories |
to be asked of the witness out of the English into |
the Japanese language, and truly and impartially to
interpret the answers of the witness thereto out .
of the Japanese language into the English language; :
and that the said witness being to me personally '
|
|
us. United States of America 843
known and known to me to be the same person
named and described in the interrogatories, being
by me first sworn to testify the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth in answer to the
several interrogatories and cross-interrogatories in
the cause in which the aforesaid stipulation, court
order, and request for deposition issued, her evi-
dence was taken down and transcribed under my
direction by Irene Cullington, a stenographer who
was by me first duly sworn truly and impartially
to take down in notes and faithfully transcribe the
testimony of the said witness Unami Kido, and
after having been read over and interpreted to, and
eorrected by her, was subscribed by her in the Jap-
anese language and a Japanese name-stamp, which
constitutes a legal signature under Japanese law,
affixed in my presence; and I further certify that
I am not counsel or kin to any of the parties to
this cause or in any manner interested in the result
thereof.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand
and seal of office at Tokyo, Japan, this 19th day of
May, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the
United States of America.
[| American Consular Service Seal. ]
service No: 939; Tariff No. 38; No fee prescribed.
[Endorsed]: Filed May 23, 1949.
844 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
In the Southern Division of the United States
District Court for the Northern District of
California
No. 31712 R
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
vs.
IVA IKUKO TOGURI D’AQUINO,
Defendant.
DEPOSITION OF KEN MURAYAMA
Deposition of Ken Murayama, taken before me,
Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the United
States of America, in Mitsui Main Bank Building,
Room 335, in Tokyo, Japan, under the authority
of a certain stipulation for taking oral designations
abroad, and upon order of the United States Dis-
trict Court, made and entered March 22, 1949, in
the Matter of United States of America vs. Iva
Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, pending in the Southern
Division of the United States District Court, for
the Northern District of California, and at issue
between the United States of America vs. Iva
Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino.
The plaintiff appearing by Frank J. Hennessy |
United States District Attorney; Thomas DeWolfe, |
Special Assistant to the Attorney General, and Noel |
Storey, Special Assistant to the Attorney General,
and the defendant, appearing by Wayne N. Collins :
and Theodore ‘’amba.
The said interrogations and answers of the wit- |
'
j
vs. Umted States of America 845
ness thereto were taken stenographically by Irene
Cullington and were then transcribed by her under
my direction, and the said transcription being there-
after read over correctly to said witness by me and
then signed by said witness In my presence.
It is Stipulated that all objections of each of the
parties hereto, including the objections to the form
of the questions propounded to the witness and to
the relevancy, materiality and competency thereof,
and the defendant’s objections to the use of the
deposition, or any part of the deposition, by plain-
tiff, on the plaintiff’s case in chief, shall be reserved
to the time of trial in this cause.
KEN MURAYAMA
of Tokyo, Japan, a translator, of lawful age, being
by me first duly sworn, deposes and says:
Direct Examination
By Mr. Tamba:
State your name, please.
Ken Murayama.
Where do you reside?
In the city of Tokyo.
What is your business or occupation ?
I am doing translating work for various mo-
PS PS ee
tion picture companies.
Q. Are vou a citizen and national of Japan?
=. I am.
Q. When did you become a citizen and national
of Japan? a, lita 1989.
Q. Where were you born?
A. New York City.
846 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Ken Murayama.)
Q. When? A. December 26, 1911.
Q. Did you receive your education in the United
States ? A. Yes.
Q. What school?
A. High school in Washington, D. C., and gradu-
ated from [2*] George Washington Universita
@. When did you come to Japan?
A. In July, 1933.
Q. Have you resided in Japan ever since?
A. Yes, except for trips to China and the Philip-
pines.
@. Have you ever returned to the United
States ? A. No.
Q. Do you know a person by the name of Iva
D’Aquino, also known as Iva Toguri?
A. I have met and seen Iva Toguri while she —
was employed in the Domei News Agency. 7]
@. When was that?
A. I can’t recall for sure. It might have been '
during the first year of the war.
Q. Have you ever seen her since that date? :
DNs AIS: |
Q. Do you know anything of her activities ;
around radio stations during the years of the war? :
A. No, only such things as I have read since. —
Q. Do you know anything about a Zero Hour !
program ? A. No, I don’t. |
Q. Do you know a person by the name of Myrtle.
Liston? A. Yes.
@. Where did you meet Miss Liston?
*Page numbering appearing at bottom of page of original /
Reporter’s Transcript.
|
i
ri g
vs. United States of America 847
(Deposition of Ken Murayama. )
A. In Manila.
Q. Under what circumstances ?
A. She was broadeasting over the Manila radio
station to the Southwest Pacific.
Q. Did you or anyone else have any part in the
preparation of the script used by Myrtle Liston?
A. Yes, I wrote the scripts Miss Liston broad-
east. Mr. Uno also wrote some of the scripts. [3]
Q. What was the nature or tenor of the scripts
you wrote for Miss Liston, if you recall?
A. Those scripts were designed to create a sense
of homesickness among troops fighting in the South-
west Pacific. Their tone was one of trying to make
the soldiers recall certain good times they might
have had when they were back in the States. Usually
the scripts were along those lines.
Q. Do you reeall any script being prepared by
you which referred to a short story of a girl at
home and a boy friend who was ineligible for the
Army ?
Mr. DeWolfe: Objected to as incompetent, not
the best evidence.
The Court: Submitted?
Mr. Collins: Yes.
The Court: The objection will have to be sus-
tained.
(A. There were several scripts. I can’t recall
the exact contents, but the general tenor was such
as you have mentioned. We had stories, short
scripts shall we say, of girls having dates with men
at home, while possibly their sweethearts or hus:
848 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Ken Murayama. ) |
bands might be fighting in the Southwest Pacifie
area.) :
Q. Do you recall anything about malaria, jungle
rot, and high cost of living, or scripts of that tenor?
Mr. DeWolfe: Object to that as immaterial and |
incompetent; hearsay; not the best evidence; irrele- |
vant. :
The Court: Objection sustained. :
(A. I can’t give you any exact quotation re- |
garding malaria or jungle rot, but I am sure some |
of the scripts must have included diseases which
were prevalent in the tropical areas. )
Q. What kind of music did you play on the |
program? :
A. We relied heavily on waltzes—music which
tended to be dreamy; usually old pieces.
Q@. Were those old pieces introduced with any
particular phrase before being played?
A. Yes—Do you remember such and such a
piece.
Q. How was that program introduced—with any
particular piece of music?
A. I believe the program came on with the play-
ing of ‘‘Auld Lang Syne.”’
Q. How did it end, if you remember?
A. We had some other signature number. I
think the word [4] ‘‘Aloha’’ was in it.
Q. Was that program broadcast short wave or |
locally ?
A. It was not broadcast locally but only short
wave.
: vs. United States of America 849
(Deposition of Ken Murayama.)
Q. Can you tell us something about the type of
‘voice Miss Liston had?
A. She had a very good voice from the stand-
point of use over the microphone. It was quite low
pitched, husky. The sort of voice that would carry
well and was in keeping with the general tenor of
the program itself,
Q. If she were a singer, in what category would
you class her as a singer?
A. A torch singer,
Q. What kind of English did she use?
A. Her English was very good. I don’t think
she was very well educated, but her pronunciation
was very good for a Filipino.
Q. Did you ever see her come to the station in-
toxicated before a broadcast?
A. Yes, several times.
Q. What did she do with the scripts on those
occasions ?
A. She got through them all right. She did a
very good job on them.
Q. I think that is all.
Q. Do you remember what hour of the day that
program came on?
A. I can’t say for certain. It might have been
mor 5:30.
Q. Did you ever announce the station when you
broadcast the program?
A. I think we announced it as PIRM.
Q. Do you know if the Japanese Government
850 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
(Deposition of Ken Murayama.)
had other broadcasting stations in the Pacific, of
your own knowledge.
Was a woman on that station?
I was in Shanghai in the very early days of
the war, in the early part of 1942, and at that time
I recall an Australian girl who was broadcasting
over station XMHA.
Q. Do you know her name?
A. McDonald was her last name. I think her
first name was Betty.
A. No, I don’t know of my own knowledge.
Q. You don’t know of one in Shanghai?
A. Yes.
Q. Were you in China during the war? [5]
A. Yes.
Q.
A.
Cross-Examination
By My. Storey:
Q. How long did you know Miss Toguri?
A. Well, I had only met her several times in
the Domei office. I can’t say I knew her very well—
just to say ‘‘hello”’ to.
Q. Did you know Miss Toguri while she was
working at Radio Tokyo?
A. No, not at all. May I add something there?
Q. No, I think that answered the question.
Q. Then you know nothing at all as to the work
Miss Toguri was doing at Radio Tokyo?
A. No, I do not. I did not know until the end |
of the war.
Q. Approximately when did Miss Liston start }
broadcasting this program from Manila?
a ee —
vs. Umted States of America 851
(Deposition of Ken Murayama. )
A. As I recall, it was either September of Oc-
tober, 1944. I believe that is right.
Q. How long did Miss Liston continue to broad-
east ?
A. I believe until the end of January, 1945, or
the first days of February. I am not sure.
Q. Did Miss Liston ever refer to herself in these
broadcasts by the name of ‘‘Ann’’?
A. Ido not recall any name like that.
Q. Did Miss Liston ever refer to herself as
“Orphan Ann’’ in that program? AY Wo!
Q. That is all.
/3s/ KEN MURAYAMA. [6]
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss.
I do solemnly swear that I will truly and im-
partially take down in notes and faithfully tran-
seribe the testimony of Ken Murayama, a witness
now to be examined. So help me God.
/8/ IRENE CULLINGTON.
Subseribed and sworn to before me this nine-
teenth day of April, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the
United States of America.
[American Consular Service Seal. ]
Service No. 589a; Tariff No. 38; No fee pre-
seribed.
852 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
Japan,
City of Tokyo,
American Consular Service—ss.
CERTIFICATE
I, Thomas W. Ainsworth, Vice Consul of the
United States of America in and for Tokyo, Japan,
duly commissioned and qualified, acting under the
authority of a certain stipulation for taking oral
designations abroad, and upon order of the United
States District Court, made and entered March 22,
1949, in the Matter of United States of America,
Plaintiff, vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, Defend-
ant, pending in the Southern Division of the United
States District Court, for the Northern District of
California, and at issue between United States of
America vs. Iva Ikuko Toguri D’Aquino, do hereby
certify that in pursuance of the aforesaid stipula-
tion and court order and at the request of Theodore
Tamba, Counsel for the defendant Iva Ikuko Toguri
D’Aquino, I examined Ken Murayama, at my office
in Room 335, Mitsui Main Bank Building, Tokyo,
Japan, on the nineteenth day of April, A.D. 1949,
and that the said witness being to me personally
known and known to me to be the same person
named and described in the interrogatories, being
by me first sworn to testify the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth in answer to the
several interrogatories and cross-interrogatories in
the cause in which the aforesaid stipulation, court
order, and request for deposition issued, his evi-
vs. United States of America 853
dence was taken down and transcribed under my
direction by Irene Cullington, a stenographer who
was by me first duly sworn truly and impartially
to take down in notes and faithfully transcribe the
testimony of the said witness Ken Murayama, and
after having been read over and corrected by him
was subscribed by him in my presence; and I further
certify that I am not counsel or kin to any of the
parties to this cause or in any manner interested
in the result thereof.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand
and seal of office at Tokyo, Japan, this fifth day of
May, A.D. 1949.
/s/ THOMAS W. AINSWORTH,
Vice Consul of the
United States of America.
[American Consular Service Seal. ]
Service No. 804; Tariff No. 38; No fee prescribed.
[Endorsed]: Filed May 13, 1949.
804 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
[Title of District Court and Cause.]
DESIGNATION OF CONTENTS OF
RECORD ON APPEAL
The defendant (appellant) hereby designates that
the whole of the record, proceedings and evidence
be contained in the record on appeal herein, and
more particularly as follows:
1948
Oct. 8&—Indictment.
Oct. 11—Minute order entry on arraignment and
oral motion for bail and continuing cause
to Oct. 14 at 1:00 p.m. for hearing on
motion that defendant be admitted to bail.
Oct. 13—Notice of Motion and Motion to be ad-
mitted to bail.
Oct. 14—Minute order that defendant’s motion for
bail be denied and providing that marshal
provide suitable place of confinement
where defendant will have full opportunity
to interview witnesses and consult with
counsel.
Oct. 27—Demand for Bill of Particulars.
Nov. 3—Demand for Discovery and Inspection.
Nov. 3—Demand for Additional Bill of Particulars.
Nov. 15—Notice and Motion to Strike.
Nov. 15—Notice and Motion to Dismiss Indictment.
Nov. 15—Notice and Motion for Discovery and In-
spection.
1948
Nov.
Nov.
Nov.
1949
Jan.
wan.
Mar.
Mar
Mar
~
vs. Umted States of America 8595
15—Notice and Motion to Dismiss Indictment
on Defenses and Objections Capable of
Determination Without Trial of General
Issue.
15—Affidavit in Support of Motions to Dis-
HSS, ete:
15—Notice and Motion for Bill of Particulars.
3—Minute order that Motion for Bill of Par-
ticulars, Motion to Dismiss Indictment be
denied, and that Motion for Discovery and
Inspection be granted as to request num-
ber 7 but denied as to remaining requests,
and that Motion to Strike Indictment be
denied.
3—Minute order that defendant pleads ‘‘ Not
Guilty’’ and setting cause for trial on May
16, 1949.
1— Motion for Order Authorizing and Direct-
ing Issuance of Subpoenas requiring at-
tendance of witnesses in a foreign country
at the trial at expense of the Government
and for service thereof.
.14—Minute order that motion to take certain
depositions be granted and that remaining
motions be denied.
.15—Order Denying Seven (7) Motions and
Granting Defendant’s Motion for Taking
Depositions Abroad.
8956 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
1949
Mar. 22—Stipulation to Taking Oral Depositions
Abroad.
Apr. 5—Motion for Lists of Witnesses and Venire-
men.
Apr. 9—Motion for Order Authorizing and Direct-
ing Issuance and Service of Subpoenas
Requiring Attendance of Witnesses at
Trial Herein at Government Expense.
Apr. 21—Notice and Motion for Postponement of
ibinre rane laa
Apr. 25—Minute order authorizing issuance and
service of subpoenas and motion for list
of witnesses and veniremen be continued
to May 2, 1949, and ordering case con-
tinued from May 16, 1949, to July 5, 1949
for trial.
May 4—Motion for Order Authorizing and Direct-
ing Issuance and Service of Subpoenas re-
quiring attendance of witnesses at trial at
expense of the Government, and Affidavit
in Support thereof.
May 18—Order Granting Defendant’s Motion for
Order Authorizing and Directing Issuance
and Service of Subpoenas of Defendant’s
Witnesses at Government Expense.
May 18—Order Denying Defendant’s Motion for
List of Witnesses and Veniremen.
May 24—Motion for Order Authorizing and Direct-
ing Issuance and Service of Subpoenas at
Government Expense.
vs. United States of America 857
1949
June J—Order Granting Defendant’s Motion to
Subpoena Albert Rickert and Edwin Kalb-
fleish, Jr., at Government Expense.
June 16—Notice and Motion for list of witnesses
and veniremen.
June 16—Notice and Motion for Supplemental Or-
der authorizing additional subsistence ex-
penses to be paid defendant’s counsel for
attending examination of witnesses abroad.
June 16—Notice and Motion for Production of
Documentary Evidence.
June 20—Order granting motion for Supplemental
Order authorizing additional subsistence
expenses to be paid by the government to
defendant’s counsel for attending exam1-
nation of witnesses abroad.
June 20—Minute order granting plaintiff’s motion
to quash subpoena duces tecum served on
Mr. Hennessy.
June 22—Order requiring plaintiff to supply de-
fendant with lists of witnesses and venire-
men.
June 22—Minute order quashing subpoenas duces
tecum issued to Mr. DeWolfe, and sub-
poena No. 148.
June 22—Minute order denying defendant’s motion
to produce.
June 28—Copy of list of witnesses and jurors.
June 29—Amended witness list.
July 5—Appearance of attorneys.
858 Iva Ikuko Toguni D’ Aquino
1949
Aug. 12—Minute entry ordering oral motion for —
judgment of acquittal continued to Au- —
gust 13, 1949.
Aug. 13—Minute order denying defendant’s motion
for judgment of acquittal.
Aug. 13—Motion for order for production, exami-
nation and inspection of records and
script.
Sept.19—Minute entries of defendant’s motions to
strike certain testimony, to dismiss indict-
ment and for judgment of acquittal, and
minute orders denying the same.
Sept.26—Minute entry reading ‘Trial resumed.
Jury instructed and retired to deliberate
upon its verdict. Ordered alternate juror
Aileen McNamara excused from further
service. It is ordered that the Marshal
furnish meals and lodging for the jurors
and 2 deputy marshals. At 11:20 p.m.
Jury retired for the night. Ordered con-
tinued to September 27, 1949, for fur-
Cider iat
20. 27—Minute entry reading ‘‘Trial resumed.
Jury requested and received certain por-
tions of transcript and certain exhibits and
retired to deliberate its verdict. At 10:15
p.m. the jury retired for the night. Or-
dered continued to September 28, 1949 for
further trial.”’
‘
;
OL
1949
vs. United States of America 859
Sept.29—Minute entry reading ‘‘Trial resumed.
Jury deliberated further upon its verdict.
After requesting and receiving certain
Volumes of testimony and further instruc-
tions and after due deliberation the Jury
returned a Verdict of ‘‘Guilty.’’ The jury
was thereupon polled. Ordered Jury be
discharged from further consideration
_ hereof and be excused, On Motion of Mr.
Collins it is ordered that this cause be con-
tinued to October 6th for Judgment.”’
Sept.29—Special Findings of the Jury finding de-
fendant not guilty on Overt Acts 1, 2, 3,
4,5, 7 and 8 but guilty on Overt Act No. 6.
Sept.29—Jury Verdict.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
3—Motion in Arrest of Judgment.
3—Motion for Acquittal or New Trial.
3—Motion for New Trial.
o—Supplemental Ground in Support of Mo-
tion for Acquittal or New Trial.
6—Minute order denying defendant’s motions
for new trial, acquittal or new trial and
in arrest of judgment.
6—Minute entry showing defendant was called
for Judgment.
6—Minute entry showing defendant was or-
dered sentenced and committed to the cus-
tody of the Attorney General for impris-
onment for a period of 10 years and fined
$10,000.
Formal judgment and commitment.
860
1949
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
3—Minute entry showing that there was filed
defendant’s instructions covered by the
court in other instructions and that de-
fendant excepts thereto on grounds they
have not been covered.
o—Minute entry showing that there was filed
defendant’s instructions which were re-
fused by court as not being correct state-
ments of law.
7—Notice and Motion of defendant for ad-
mission to bail pending appeal.
7—Order staying execution of sentence to and
including October 17, 1949.
(—Affidavit and Order for filing appeal in
forma pauperis.
7—Notice of Appeal.
The reporter’s transcript of all evidence,
oral and documentary, which was steno-
graphically reported and was taken down
on behalf of the plaintiff and also on be-
half of the defendant, including all oral
motions made by the respective parties
and orders and rulings of Court made
thereon. All exhibits introduced in evi-
dence by either side and all exhibits dif-
fered in evidence by the defendant and
rejected and subsequently marked exhibits
for identification, excepting the following
duplications:
Government’s Exhibit 1 includes the in-
vs. Umted States of America 861
1949
dictment which may be omitted from the
exhibit.
Defendant’s Exhibit BP contains dup-
lications of Government’s Exhibits 8, 9,
10 and 11; the pages of defendant’s Ex-
hibit BP which duplicate such exhibits
may be omitted.
The defendant’s Exhibit UU contains
duplication of defendant’s Exhibit B; de-
fendant’s Exhibit B may be omitted.
All instructions given to the jury by the
Court and all instructions the defendant
requested the Court to give to the jury
which the Court refused to give to the
jury, and also the arguments of counsel to
the jury.
All depositions offered or admitted in evi-
dence.
Oct. —Order Releasing Reporter’s Transcript.
Oct. —This Designation of Contents of Record
on Appeal, and stipulation and order that
original exhibits be transmitted to Appel-
late Court.
/s/ WAYNE M. COLLINS,
/s/ GEORGE OLSHAUSEN,
/s/ THEODORE TAMBA,
Attorneys for Defendant.
Receipt of copy attached.
[Endorsed]: Filed October 11, 1949.
862 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
[ Title of District Court and Cause. ]
ORDER STAYING EXECUTION
Good cause appearing therefor, it is hereby or-
dered that the sentence and judgment imposed in
the above-entitled case on October 6, 1949, be and
the same is hereby further stayed to and ineluding
the 3rd day of November, 1949.
Dated: October 17, 1949.
/s/ MICHAEL J. ROCHE,
U.S. District Judge.
[Endorsed]: Filed October 17, 1949.
[Title of District Court and Cause. |
ORDER RELEASING REPORTER’S
TRANSCRIPT
It is ordered that the Clerk of this Court release
to the defendant the reporter’s transeript of the
evidence and proceedings had at the trial herein for
use by the defendant in connection with her appeal
to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit from the. judgment heretofore entered
against her in the above-entitled cause.
Dated: October 17th, 1949.
/s/ MICHAEL J. ROCHE,
U.S. District Judge.
OAS.
/s/ TOM DEWOLFE,
Sp. Asst. to the Atty. Gen.
[Endorsed]: Filed October 17, 1949.
vs. United States of America 863
[Title of District Court and Cause. ]
STIPULATION AND ORDER THAT ORIGI-
Mal PAaPEES AND EXHIBITS BH
TRANSMITTED TO THE U.S. COURT OF
APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FOR USE ON APPEAL
It is stipulated between the parties hereto that
the original exhibits and papers, including those
introduced into evidence and also those marked for
identification in the trial herein, shall constitute a
part of the record on appeal herein, and that the
same shall be transmitted to the U. S. Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for consideration on
appeal herein as part of the record on appeal, in
heu of copies thereof.
Dated: October 11, 1949.
/s/ WAYNE M. COLLINS,
/s/ GEORGE OLSHAUSEN,
/s/ THEODORE TAMBA,
Attorneys for Defendant.
/s/ FRANK J. HENNESSY,
/3s/ TOM DEWOLEF,
Attorneys for Plaintiff.
So Ordered: Oct. 17th, 1949.
/s/ MICHAEL J. ROCHE,
U.S. District Judge.
[Endorsed]: Filed October 17, 1949.
864 Iva Ikuko Toguni D’ Aquino
[Title of District Court and Cause. ]
DESIGNATION OF ADDITIONAL CONTENTS
OF RECORD ON APPEAL
The defendant (appellant) hereby designates that
the following documents also be included in the
record on appeal herein, to-wit:
1) Notice of Motion and Motion for Admission ,
of Defendant to Bail Pending Appeal.
2) Minute Order Denying Bail.
3) Order Staying Execution of Charge Dated
Oct. 7, 1949 and like Order Dated October 17, 1949.
/s/ WAYNE M. COLLINS,
/s/ GEORGE OLSHAUSEN,
/s/ THEODORE TAMBA,
Attorneys for Defendant.
Receipt of copy attached.
[Endorsed]: Filed October 19, 1949.
vs. United States of America 865
[Title of District Court and Cause. |
CERTIFICATE OF CLERK TO
RECORD ON APPEAL
I, C. W. Calbreath, Clerk of the District Court
for the United States for the Northern District of
California, do hereby certify that the foregoing and
accompanying documents and exhibits, listed below,
are the originals filed in this Court, or true and
eorrect copies of orders entered on the minutes of
this Court, in the above-entitled case, and that they
constitute the Record on Appeal herein, as desig-
nated by the Appellant, to wit:
Indictment.
Minute Order of October 11, 1948—Arraignment,
ete.
Notion of Motion and Motion to be Admitted to
Bail. -
Minute Order of October 14, 1948—Defendant’s
Motion for Bail Denied, ete.
Demand for Bill of Particulars.
Demand for Discovery and Inspection.
Demand for Additional Bill of Particulars.
Notice of Motion to Strike and Motion to Strike.
Notice of Motion to Dismiss Indictment and Mo-
tion to Dismiss Indictment.—Includes Deft’s Ex.
No. A (Mo. to Dismiss. )
Notice and Motion for Discovery and Inspection.
Notice and Motion to Dismiss Indictment on De-
fenses and Objections Capable of Determination
Without Trial of General Issue.
Affidavit in Support of Motions to Dismiss.
866 Iva Ikuko Togurt D’ Aquino
Notice and Motion for Bill of Particulars.
Minute Order of January 3, 1949—Motions for
Bill of Particulars, to Dismiss Indictment and to
Strike Indictment Denied—Plea of Not Quilty.
Notice and Motion for Order Authorizing and
Directing Issuance of Subpoenas, etc.
Minute Order of March 14, 1949, that Motion to
Take Certain Depositions be Granted, etc.
Order Denying Seven Motions etc.,
Stipulations to Taking Oral Designations Abroad.
Notice and Motion for Lists of Witnesses and
Veniremen.
Notice and Motion for Order Authorizing and
Directing Issuance and Service of Subpoenas, ete.
Notice and Motion for Postponement of Time of
Trial.
Minute Order of April 25, 1949—Ordered Issu--
ance of Subpoenas, Continuing Motion for List of
Witnesses, ete.
Notice and Motion for Order Authorizing and
Directing Issuance and Service of Subpoenas, ete.
Order Granting Defendant’s Motions for Order
Authorizing and Directing Issuance and Service
of Subpoenas, ete.
Order Denying Motion for Lists of Witnesses
and Veniremen.
Notice and Motion for Order Authorizing and
Directing Issuance and Service of Subpoenas, ete.
Order Granting Defendant’s Motion for Order
Authorizing and Directing Issuance and Service of
Subpoenas to Albert Rickert and Edwin Kalbfleish,
a:., “ete:
|
|
us. Umted States of America 867
Motion for Lists of Witnesses and Veniremen.
Motion for Supplemental Order Authorizing Ad-
ditional Subsistence Expenses, ete.
Motion for Production of Documentary Evidence.
Notice of Motion for Production of Documentary
Evidence.
Order Granting Motion for Supplemental Order
Authorizing Additional Subsistence, ete.
Minute Order of June 20, 1949—Order Granting
Motions to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum, for Ad-
ditional Expenses and for List of Witnesses and
Veniremen.
Order Requiring Plaintiff to Supply Defendant
with Lists of Venireman and Witnesses.
Subpoena to Tom DeWolfe.
Minute Order of June 22, 1949—Quashing Sub-
poena Duces Tecum and Denying Defendant’s Mo-
tion to Produce.
Appearance of Attorneys.
Minute Order of August 12, 1949—Continuing
Oral Motion for Judgment of Acquittal.
Minute Order of August 13, 1949—Denying De-
fendant’s Motion for Judgment of Acquittal.
Motion for Order for Production, Examination
and Inspection of Records and Scripts.
Minute Order of September 19, 1949—Denying
Motion to Strike Certain Testimony, To. Strike
7. 8. Exhibits Nos. 2 and 15, To Dismiss Indict-
ment and for Acquittal.
Minute Order of September 26, 1949—Court’s
868 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
Instructions to the Jury, Alternate Juror Excused,
ete.
Minute Order of September 27, 1949—Portions
of Transcript and Exhibit Requested and Delivered
to Jury, ete.
Minute Order of September 29, 1949—Jury Re-
quested and Received Certain Volumes of Testi-
mony, Further Instructions of the Court, Verdict
and Special Findings, ete.
Special Findings by the Jury.
Verdict.
Motion for Arrest of Judgment.
Motion for Acquittal or New Trial.
Motion for New Trial.
Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for
New Trial.
Supplemental Ground in Support of Motion
Heretofore Filed for Acquittal or for New Trial.
Supplemental Authorities on Motion for New
Trial.
Memorandum on Behalf of United States in Op-
position to Defendant’s Motions for a New Trial,
Judgment of Acquittal, and in Arrest of Judgment.
Defendant’s Instructions Covered by the Court
in Other Instructions.
Defendant’s Instructions refused by the Court as
Not Correct Statements of the Law.
Minute Order of October 6, 1949—Denying Mo-
tion for New Trial, Denying Motion for Acquittal
or New Trial, Denying Motion in Arrest of Judg-
ment—Sentence.
Arrest of Judgment—Sentence.
{
vs. Umted States of America 869
Judgment and Commitment.
Notice of Motion for Admission of the Defendant
' To Bail Pending Appeal.
Order Staying Execution.
Affidavit of Defendant re Dispensing With Pay-
ment of Fees and Costs of Printing Record on Ap-
peal.
- Order Dispensing With Payment of Fees and
Costs of Printing Record on Appeal.
Notice of Appeal.
Minute Order of October 19, 1949—Denying Mo-
tion for Bail Pending Appeal.
Designation of Contents of Record on Appeal.
Order Staying Execution.
Order Releasing Reporter’s Transcript.
Stipulation and Order That Original Papers and
Exhibits Be Transmitted to the U. 8S. Court of
Appeals, ete.
Designation of Additional Contents of Record on
Appeal.
Reporter’s Transcript for November 22, 1948—
Motion to Dismiss, For a Bill of Particulars, To
Strike, and for Discovery and Inspection.
Reporter’s Transcript for December 20, 1948—
Hearing on Special Motions of Defendant.
Reporter’s Transcript for January 3, 1949.
54 Volumes of Reporter’s Transcripts.
Plaintiff’s Exhibits Nos. 1 (Also Defendant’s
ment; A) 2, 3, 4, 5,6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 18, 14
meee, 17, 18, 29, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28,
Zo, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42,
870 Iva Ikuko Toguri D’ Aquino
43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 58, 54, 55, 56,
57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 79,
71 (In the Deposition of J. A. Abranches Pinto), ©
72, 73, 74, and 75.
Defendant’s Exhibits A, (Also Plaintiff’s Ex- |
hibit No. 7), B, C, D, E, F, G, H, 1, J, K, De
NO, P, Q, R, 8, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Y-1, Zam
AA, BB, CC, DD, EE, (in Pinto Deposition), FF —
(in Pinto Deposition), GG (in Pinto Deposition),
HH, (in Pinto Deposition), II, (in Pinto Deposi- —
tion), JJ Cin Pinto Deposition), KK (in Pinto |
Deposition), LL Gn Pinto Deposition), MM, NN,
OO, PP, QQ, RR, SS, TT, UU, VV, WW, XG
YY, ZZ, BA, BC, BD, BE, BF, BG, BH, BI, Bu,
BK, BL, BM, BN, BO, BP, BQ, BR, BS, (19 Dep-
ositions) (Brown Suit—3 pieces—accompanying
Deposition of Toshikatsu Kodaira), BT (23 Sub-
poenas), BU, and BV.
In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my
hand and affixed the seal of said District Court this
24th day of October, A.D. 1949.
C. W. CALBREATH,
Clerk,
[Seal] /3/ M. KE. VAN BUREN,
Deputy Clerk.
vs. Umted States of America 871
[Endorsed]: No. 12383. United States Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Iva Ikuko Toguri
D’ Aquino, Appellant, vs. United States of America,
Appellee. Transcript of Record. Appeal from the
United States District Court for the Northern Dis-
trict of California, Southern Division.
Filed October 24, 1949.
/s/ PAUL P. O’BRIEN,
Clerk of the United States Court of Appeals for
the Ninth Circuit.
SO
Live Music
Archive
Librivox
Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland
Museum of Art
Internet
Arcade
Console Living Room
Open Library
American
Libraries
TV News
Understanding
9/11